NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok so is homosexuality actually "wrong." you tell me. And dont give me any of this "there is no absolute truth, do whats 'right' to you" crap. I want an intellegent answer from someone out there.

Topic has been done to death my son.

It breaks down(very simplistically):

American Religion : It is a sin against god. EVIL I TELL YOU! EVIL!!!!
American Conservatives: Some of the above and a little of "They can't breed so they don't deserve special treatment"
American Liberals: Got no problem
Europeans: Pretty much "If they don't bother me......"

Hmmm foxhole time? ;)

Look they ain't hurting anybody so let 'em at it.

I see alot of you black forrest. Youve said something in almost every forum I've been interested in.

so why do you want to discuss this topic now?

is it a personal thing?

are you "curious"?

do you hope to trap some poor fool into taking a stance then you will evicerate him?

you have an opinion already, why didnt you come right out with it?

Topic has been done to death my son.

It breaks down(very simplistically):

American Religion : It is a sin against god. EVIL I TELL YOU! EVIL!!!!
American Conservatives: Some of the above and a little of "They can't breed so they don't deserve special treatment"
American Liberals: Got no problem
Europeans: Pretty much "If they don't bother me......"

Hmmm foxhole time? ;)
You forget those who are qualified to make a statement because they are directly affected by the hatemongering: Gays!!

Of course being a Homosexual is NOT wrong. How could it be?! It is a form of sexuality, "created" by nature for one reason or another. What I consider wrong is this constant scapegoat mentality always looking for another minority to blame problems on and gays are at an all time high on the popularity list for this, which SUCKS!! How would you feel if suddenly heterosexuality was "deviant" and treated like dirt, discriminated against, outlawed etc? Instead of returning to middle age situations where everything not conforming with catholic religion was condemned and erradicated, mankind should learn to accept each other the way it is.

nation states uses the term "slippery slope" alot. I believe that we have one of these here. Thats why we care even if they arnt hurting anybody.

You forget those who are qualified to make a statement because they are directly affected by the hatemongering: Gays!!

Of course being a Homosexual is NOT wrong. How could it be?! It is a form of sexuality, "created" by nature for one reason or another. What I consider wrong is this constant scapegoat mentality always looking for another minority to blame problems on and gays are at an all time high on the popularity list for this, which SUCKS!! How would you feel if suddenly heterosexuality was "deviant" and treated like dirt, discriminated against, outlawed etc? Instead of returning to middle age situations where everything not conforming with catholic religion was condemned and erradicated, mankind should learn to accept each other the way it is.

An incredible sidestep from the original question. I applaude you.
1) no one has said anything negative about gays here yet.
2) It's obviously not "created" by nature, as everything else in nature works (aka reproduction)
3)Discrimination isnt the topic here. I'm not discriminating and I dont look down on any homosexuals.

An incredible sidestep from the original question. I applaude you.
1) no one has said anything negative about gays here yet.
2) It's obviously not "created" by nature, as everything else in nature works (aka reproduction)
3)Discrimination isnt the topic here. I'm not discriminating and I dont look down on any homosexuals.
2. Wrong. That is the equivilent of saying that all reproductive disorders aren't created by nature.

An incredible sidestep from the original question. I applaude you.
1) no one has said anything negative about gays here yet.
2) It's obviously not "created" by nature, as everything else in nature works (aka reproduction)
3)Discrimination isnt the topic here. I'm not discriminating and I dont look down on any homosexuals.
You wanted to know whether or not homosexuality is "wrong". I told you, it's not wrong and in the same post explained to you why other things regarding homosexuality and how people deal with it are wrong. End of story.

2) It's obviously not "created" by nature, as everything else in nature works (aka reproduction)

if i'm not mistaken, some animals in zoos have been seen showing homosexual behavior....i'll see if i can find a link, but don't get any hopes up.

2. Wrong. That is the equivilent of saying that all reproductive disorders aren't created by nature.

So homosexuality is a disorder?


Hehe I love twisting people's words around :D:p

There's nothing wrong with homosexuality. Now liking reality TV, that's definately wrong.

So homosexuality is a disorder?



I love putting words in peoples mouths its so deliciously evil :devil:
Nope. Read what I wrote. It was a comparison.

Nope. Read what I wrote. It was a comparison.

Its called a joke.

ok so it was easier than i thought to find something....

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/07/MNG3N4RAV41.DTL

I don't feel wrong as a homosexual, so, then, why would it be wrong if it's right to me?

So homosexuality is a disorder?


Hehe I love twisting people's words around :D :P

Saying that homosexuality is wrong because it does not lead to biological reproduction is equivalent to saying that all reproductive disorders are unnatural. Alas, there are "real" reproductive disorders which exist and thus are obviously natural. Nature cannot be limited to things that reproduce. This is not the case with quite many things in nature which cannot reproduce (e.g. everything not living, which is still natural).

Ok so is homosexuality actually "wrong." you tell me. And dont give me any of this "there is no absolute truth, do whats 'right' to you" crap. I want an intellegent answer from someone out there.

It has been wrong according to every past generation in US history. I think it certainly has been becoming more acceptable in most of the more populated states. With the states having the say over the matter I don't think it is of the caliber that would constitute something of the seriousness of the inequality of slavery during that period of time. I mean when we start having states condoning homesexuality, much like how the many states that did not endorse slavery. That will be a time that will justify a National stance on the matter. From a personal stance I could careless what any consenting adult people do with their lives. Do what you like as my neighbor just don't harm anyone in the process.

ok so it was easier than i thought to find something....

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/07/MNG3N4RAV41.DTL

I just read the article it doesn't really make any specific conclusions. In fact, it says that using animals as a yardstick for humans is not a very good idea. Using the example of the occurance of infanticide that occurs very often in the animal kingdom.

You forget those who are qualified to make a statement because they are directly affected by the hatemongering: Gays!!

Of course being a Homosexual is NOT wrong. How could it be?! It is a form of sexuality, "created" by nature for one reason or another. What I consider wrong is this constant scapegoat mentality always looking for another minority to blame problems on and gays are at an all time high on the popularity list for this, which SUCKS!! How would you feel if suddenly heterosexuality was "deviant" and treated like dirt, discriminated against, outlawed etc? Instead of returning to middle age situations where everything not conforming with catholic religion was condemned and erradicated, mankind should learn to accept each other the way it is.

I beleive if some deity controls society, that GLBT people were designed to further support the society that allready exists, and especially to hold high positions in intellectual and spiritual matters - as they, ideally, can have the strengths of both sexes and the drawbacks of neither. Virility without chauvenism - intution without vanity. A lesbian woman is an empowered woman. A gay man is a sensitive man. Power and delicacy combined are the pinacle of all virtue, and I beleive that GLBT people have the charactoristics to be pillars of society - as they often were in non-patriarchal places. Homosexuality is in no ways a sin, it is a blessing, if not a calling. Now, obviously this doesn't apply to all GLBT people, there are plenty who are as stupid as the next one, but on average, I think the instances of intellectuals and spiritualists are much higher in the gay crowd.

Saying that homosexuality is wrong because it does not lead to biological reproduction is equivalent to saying that all reproductive disorders are unnatural. Alas, there are "real" reproductive disorders which exist and thus are obviously natural. Nature cannot be limited to things that reproduce. This is not the case with quite many things in nature which cannot reproduce (e.g. everything not living, which is still natural).

Apparently I NEED to add that [sarcasm] or [joke] or else everyone will take me seriously. And thats the last thing I want :D [joke joke joke]

I don't feel wrong as a homosexual, so, then, why would it be wrong if it's right to me?


exactly. its right to some and wrong to others. if youre a god fearing practicing christian who believes in what the bible says, then its wrong to you. if you are confident with your relationship with god and you are a homosexual, then its right to you. and then there are those who dont factor religous influence into the equasion and simply feel its right or wrong.there are a thousand other instances, but it boils down to the individual. some think abortion is wrong, some think its ok. some thing inter-racial relationships are wrong. i think it would be impossible to answer the original question of "is it wrong?" its just not a cut and dry issue.

It has been wrong according to every past generation in US history. I think it certainly has been becoming more acceptable in most of the more populated states. With the states having the say over the matter I don't think it is of the caliber that would constitute something of the seriousness of the inequality of slavery during that period of time. I mean when we start having states condoning homesexuality, much like how the many states that did not endorse slavery. That will be a time that will justify a National stance on the matter. From a personal stance I could careless what any consenting adult people do with their lives. Do what you like as my neighbor just don't harm anyone in the process.

Native Americans held gays in high esteem. A requirement to be a shaman in the choktaw tribe was to be gay and androgynous. There's a very ancient tradition of homosexuals as priests and shamans among native americans - it was encouraged. For the vast majority of the time this land has been populated homosexuality has been not only acceptable but celibrated as a spiritual ideal. It's only since the european invasion with the subsequent rape of the earth and forced convertions that homosexuality has fallen into such low esteem.

2) It's obviously not "created" by nature, as everything else in nature works (aka reproduction)

That depends on how you define "works". If it's only for its purpose of having pleasure, it works just fine.

I just read the article it doesn't really make any specific conclusions. In fact, it says that using animals as a yardstick for humans is not a very good idea. Using the example of the occurance of infanticide that occurs very often in the animal kingdom.
sorry bout that....i must admit i didn't actually read the article, other than skimming the first couple paragraphs to make sure it was legit. all i did was google "zoo homosexual" (while crossing my fingers that i wouldn't only get a flood of gay porn sites) and that was the first result. :rolleyes:

sorry bout that....i must admit i didn't actually read the article, other than skimming the first couple paragraphs to make sure it was legit. all i did was google "zoo homosexual" (while crossing my fingers that i wouldn't only get a flood of gay porn sites) and that was the first result. :rolleyes:


LOL

An incredible sidestep from the original question. I applaude you.
1) no one has said anything negative about gays here yet.
2) It's obviously not "created" by nature, as everything else in nature works (aka reproduction)
3)Discrimination isnt the topic here. I'm not discriminating and I dont look down on any homosexuals.

the majority of individuals on this planet never reproduce. look at social insects, the most successful species in existance. often only one of their entire society reproduces, while the rest support the children and eachother without actually giving birth.

sorry bout that....i must admit i didn't actually read the article, other than skimming the first couple paragraphs to make sure it was legit. all i did was google "zoo homosexual" (while crossing my fingers that i wouldn't only get a flood of gay porn sites) and that was the first result. :rolleyes:

Well, if you were to get homsexual porn. 50/50 chance (probably a little better) that it be lesbian porn right? Whats so bad about that? :D:D:D

Native Americans held gays in high esteem. A requirement to be a shaman in the choktaw tribe was to be gay and androgynous. There's a very ancient tradition of homosexuals as priests and shamans among native americans - it was encouraged. For the vast majority of the time this land has been populated homosexuality has been not only acceptable but celibrated as a spiritual ideal. It's only since the european invasion with the subsequent rape of the earth and forced convertions that homosexuality has fallen into such low esteem.
Homosexuality used to be a widespread and accepted form of male-male and female-female interaction. Usually between an elderly and a younger member of society, during which the younger learned specific things from the elder, much like a close father-son relationship, but that this also included sexual activity. My "boyfriend" is 30 years older than me and I feel happyand secure with him and he is happy to have me to care for. People may ay it's wrong and whatnot - personally I dont care. It feels right to me and my partner and me don't hurt anybody. However the discrimination against gays is hurting me.

Homosexuality used to be a widespread and accepted form of male-male and female-female interaction. Usually between an elderly and a younger member of society, during which the younger learned specific things from the elder, much like a close father-son relationship, but that this also included sexual activity. My "boyfriend" is 30 years older than me and I feel happyand secure with him and he is happy to have me to care for. People may ay it's wrong and whatnot - personally I dont care. It feels right to me and my partner and me don't hurt anybody. However the discrimination against gays is hurting me.

30 years older....I don't care if your gay, straight, lesbian, bi, whatever. Thats a pretty big age gap. But I guess thats fine for you.

the majority of individuals on this planet never reproduce. look at social insects, the most successful species in existance. often only one of their entire society reproduces, while the rest support the children and eachother without actually giving birth.


are you joking? the majority of individuals on this planet never reproduce? you sound way too intelligent in previous posts to make a comment such as that. reproduction is what makes the world go 'round. in every aspect. plant, animal, human.

if i'm not mistaken, some animals in zoos have been seen showing homosexual behavior....i'll see if i can find a link, but don't get any hopes up.
not just in zoos. animals have been frequently observed to show homosexual behaviors. animals like kangaroos, songbirds, giraffes, goats, sheep, mice, penguins, and large cats make the list, both in captivity and in the wild. bottlenose dolphins never form life-long heterosexual pairs, but they have been observed to for homosexual pairings that are only briefly interupted by the mating season. bonobo chimpanzees, our closest genetic relatives, are entirely bisexual, and lesbian intercourse is MORE COMMON among them than any form of heterosexual contact.

the majority of individuals on this planet never reproduce. look at social insects, the most successful species in existance. often only one of their entire society reproduces, while the rest support the children and eachother without actually giving birth.
Social insects are individuals? I thought they were a hive mind. :)

are you joking? the majority of individuals on this planet never reproduce? you sound way too intelligent in previous posts to make a comment such as that. reproduction is what makes the world go 'round. in every aspect. plant, animal, human.
wrong. the majority of life on this planet, as stated before, is (by volume) comprised of social insects that do NOT individually reproduce.

wrong. the majority of life on this planet, as stated before, is (by volume) comprised of social insects that do NOT individually reproduce.


that makes zero sense.brush up on your biology, sociology and statistics and youll see how wrong you are

not just in zoos. animals have been frequently observed to show homosexual behaviors. animals like kangaroos, songbirds, giraffes, goats, sheep, mice, penguins, and large cats make the list, both in captivity and in the wild. bottlenose dolphins never form life-long heterosexual pairs, but they have been observed to for homosexual pairings that are only briefly interupted by the mating season. bonobo chimpanzees, our closest genetic relatives, are entirely bisexual, and lesbian intercourse is MORE COMMON among them than any form of heterosexual contact.

You obviously didn't read the article that came with that post. Its not a good idea to compare animal behavior with humans. The article cites the example of infanticde being common among animals. Besides, there arn't even any specific conclusions on animal homosexuality.

and im not talking about ants, bees and wasps. im talking about society and population.

Homosexuality used to be a widespread and accepted form of male-male and female-female interaction. Usually between an elderly and a younger member of society, during which the younger learned specific things from the elder, much like a close father-son relationship, but that this also included sexual activity. My "boyfriend" is 30 years older than me and I feel happyand secure with him and he is happy to have me to care for. People may ay it's wrong and whatnot - personally I dont care. It feels right to me and my partner and me don't hurt anybody. However the discrimination against gays is hurting me.

athenian love - it was common for older athenian men to take on boys to train socially, and sex was accepted and to some degree accepted. athens was arguably one of the most influencial and important centers of all of western history. It sure can't hurt to emulate them, though I hate to talk about this aspect because people start screaming about pedophilia - which is usually equated with manipulation and rape...more power to you guys though.

I personally have nothing against gay people and have actually been friends with homosexuals before. However, my opinion on them might be interpreted as "anti-gay."
Here's what I think:
I think homosexuality is a minor mental disorder. My reasoning is due to the fact that they can't reproduce and the purpose of being alive is to keep your species alive, usually by means of reproduction. Should they be discriminated against just because of their "mental disorder." Definitely not. That would be like discriminating people who suffer from depression, because after all it can be considered a mental disorder.
Homosexuals deserve equal treatment and it is outrageous that marriage between them is not allowed. Just because you have different sexual preferences doesn't mean you should hate people who do. That would be like hating people who like pickles because you don't.
Absolutely ridiculous.

2) It's obviously not "created" by nature, as everything else in nature works (aka reproduction)

incorrect. homosexual behavior has been demonstrated to be an evolutionarily sound strategy for a number of possible reasons, and individual reproduction is NOT a standing law for evolutionary success. i'll give you a short break down, but it's gonna be truncated because i don't feel like typing up a biology text book right now :).

1) homosexual pairings may increase brood care because partners cooperate to rear the young that each produces with temporary hetero mating partners. in species where mating couples do not remain together, and where only one parent rears young, it is not unusual to see groups of that gender who cooperate to increase the likelihood their young will survive. in many cases, these groups consist of two same-sex individuals who cohabitate, engage in sexual stimulation outside the breeding season, and cooperate to rear each other's young.

2) homosexual pairings may occur more frequently in species that demonstrate significant sexual size dimorphism. size dimorphism is when one gender is significantly larger than the other; for example, in birds of prey the female is usually larger than the male, and in elephants the male is larger than the female. when one gender is smaller than the other, the smaller gender will sometimes be more likely to show homosexual pairings, either for foraging purposes outside the breeding season, or for group defense of territory.

3) in apes (and possibly in dolphins), sexual activity is sometimes used to regulate group tension. among bonobo chimps, sexual contact occurs frequently even when females are nonreceptive, and the sexual contact may occur between any possible combination of individuals. this contact can be used to diffuse tense situations, such as when food is introduced to a group and everybody wants to grab it at the same time. the contact can also be used to establish social roles and hierarchy, with the alpha female choosing to welcome certain other members of the tribe into sexual contact with her in order to express her favor of them.

4) in many cases where resources are thinned or there are other limiting factors, it may not be worth it for an animal to strike out on its own and form its own family or nest; the risks may out weigh the potential gain. in these cases, it is not unusual to see the animal remain with its parents and help to rear its brothers and sisters, because those siblings are as genetically related to the animal as its own offspring would be (50% related).

4b) social insects like ants function as collectives not because of some ant altruism, but because it is actually a good deal for them; in an ant colony, females have a full set of chromosomes, but males have only half a set, and the result (if you do all the math) is that a mother is LESS related to her daughters than a sister is related to her other sisters. therefore, if an individual ant wishes to increase the likelihood her genes will continue, she should help care for her sisters rather than trying to start her own nest, especially since there are significant risks to striking out on one's own to form a new nest. [the reason why some ants do "bite the bullet" and become queens is really complicated, and i don't want to go into it here, but feel free to look it up if you think it's a problem.]

that's all i have time for right now, i may add more in a while.

I personally don't think Homosexuality is wrong If people are in love they're in love theres not stopping it and population wise its not liek every where u turn around somones gay so i wouldn't worry about the popualtion. I don't think theres any reason to hate them they're jsut different just liek how everyone is different in some way from everyone else.

I personally have nothing against gay people and have actually been friends with homosexuals before. However, my opinion on them might be interpreted as "anti-gay."
Here's what I think:
I think homosexuality is a minor mental disorder. My reasoning is due to the fact that they can't reproduce and the purpose of being alive is to keep your species alive, usually by means of reproduction. Should they be discriminated against just because of their "mental disorder." Definitely not. That would be like discriminating people who suffer from depression, because after all it can be considered a mental disorder.
Homosexuals deserve equal treatment and it is outrageous that marriage between them is not allowed. Just because you have different sexual preferences doesn't mean you should hate people who do. That would be like hating people who like pickles because you don't.
Absolutely ridiculous.


so what about bi-sexuals? do you think they have a mental disorder?

I personally have nothing against gay people and have actually been friends with homosexuals before. However, my opinion on them might be interpreted as "anti-gay."
Here's what I think:
I think homosexuality is a minor mental disorder. My reasoning is due to the fact that they can't reproduce and the purpose of being alive is to keep your species alive, usually by means of reproduction. Should they be discriminated against just because of their "mental disorder." Definitely not. That would be like discriminating people who suffer from depression, because after all it can be considered a mental disorder.
Homosexuals deserve equal treatment and it is outrageous that marriage between them is not allowed. Just because you have different sexual preferences doesn't mean you should hate people who do. That would be like hating people who like pickles because you don't.
Absolutely ridiculous.
your reasoning for homosexuality being a mental disorder is disproven in my earlier post. congrats, you no longer need to be anti-gay at all, since homosexuality has been definitively proven to be an evolutionarily stable solution!

that makes zero sense.brush up on your biology, sociology and statistics and youll see how wrong you are

darling, have you ever watched the discovery channel? they have a "queen", in the case of bees they actually make EVERY other female in the group sterile. same with termites, ants, wasps, etc. I'm not saying that what bugs do is any sort of moral precident, but reproduction is NOT allways the only reason for individuals to exist, and again, most individuals have existed to improve the function of society as a whole, not to actually make it larger. Look at your own body - how much of it is devoted to sex, versus defense, transportation, thought, etc? the most successful biological entities are those that don't reproduce as individuals, but those who work together for the good of the whole. Again, using animals as moral precidents is stupid, but so is saying that the world goes round by INDIVIDUAL reproduction - it doesn't.

your reasoning for homosexuality being a mental disorder is disproven in my earlier post. congrats, you no longer need to be anti-gay at all, since homosexuality has been definitively proven to be an evolutionarily stable solution!

I didn't see any actual proof in that post about the evolutionary benefits of homosexuality in a population. I saw inferences, and a few educated guesses. But all this involves reasoning, not actual evidence. Just don't use the word proof when it isn't actual proof.

You obviously didn't read the article that came with that post. Its not a good idea to compare animal behavior with humans. The article cites the example of infanticde being common among animals. Besides, there arn't even any specific conclusions on animal homosexuality.
i didn't read that particular article at all, because i have read dozens of others and already know the scoop.

1) it is a very good idea to use animal models when discussing evolutionary possibilities, since humans are animals and must follow the same laws of selection that all other life follows. if homosexuality is shown to be an evolutionarily valid solution, then it cannot logically be argued that being gay is wrong because it is unnatural; what nature designs is natural, and therefore people need to find a different reason to say gay=immoral.
2) whether or not an action is "moral" is very different than whether or not it is evolutionarily stable. infanticide is not evolutionarily stable for humans, but it is for other animals. i'm not trying to make claims about "morality," since i believe morality is purely subjective, i am simply responding to the claim that homosexuality is immoral because it is not evolutionarily valid.
3) there are some very very specific conclusions about animal homosexuality, including the proven fact that it is often an evolutionarily sound strategy...that means that for many species it is just as advantageous to be in a homosexual "relationship" as it is to be in a heterosexual relationship.

incorrect. homosexual behavior has been demonstrated to be an evolutionarily sound strategy for a number of possible reasons, and individual reproduction is NOT a standing law for evolutionary success. i'll give you a short break down, but it's gonna be truncated because i don't feel like typing up a biology text book right now :).

1) homosexual pairings may increase brood care because partners cooperate to rear the young that each produces with temporary hetero mating partners. in species where mating couples do not remain together, and where only one parent rears young, it is not unusual to see groups of that gender who cooperate to increase the likelihood their young will survive. in many cases, these groups consist of two same-sex individuals who cohabitate, engage in sexual stimulation outside the breeding season, and cooperate to rear each other's young.

2) homosexual pairings may occur more frequently in species that demonstrate significant sexual size dimorphism. size dimorphism is when one gender is significantly larger than the other; for example, in birds of prey the female is usually larger than the male, and in elephants the male is larger than the female. when one gender is smaller than the other, the smaller gender will sometimes be more likely to show homosexual pairings, either for foraging purposes outside the breeding season, or for group defense of territory.

3) in apes (and possibly in dolphins), sexual activity is sometimes used to regulate group tension. among bonobo chimps, sexual contact occurs frequently even when females are nonreceptive, and the sexual contact may occur between any possible combination of individuals. this contact can be used to diffuse tense situations, such as when food is introduced to a group and everybody wants to grab it at the same time. the contact can also be used to establish social roles and hierarchy, with the alpha female choosing to welcome certain other members of the tribe into sexual contact with her in order to express her favor of them.

4) in many cases where resources are thinned or there are other limiting factors, it may not be worth it for an animal to strike out on its own and form its own family or nest; the risks may out weigh the potential gain. in these cases, it is not unusual to see the animal remain with its parents and help to rear its brothers and sisters, because those siblings are as genetically related to the animal as its own offspring would be (50% related).

4b) social insects like ants function as collectives not because of some ant altruism, but because it is actually a good deal for them; in an ant colony, females have a full set of chromosomes, but males have only half a set, and the result (if you do all the math) is that a mother is LESS related to her daughters than a sister is related to her other sisters. therefore, if an individual ant wishes to increase the likelihood her genes will continue, she should help care for her sisters rather than trying to start her own nest, especially since there are significant risks to striking out on one's own to form a new nest. [the reason why some ants do "bite the bullet" and become queens is really complicated, and i don't want to go into it here, but feel free to look it up if you think it's a problem.]

that's all i have time for right now, i may add more in a while.


i dont think youll see ants, bees, dolphins, apes and whatever else in a gay bar. we are talking about is homosexuality wrong. you are simply trying to give us a re cap of an episode of animal planet, and personally-i think you just like to hear/see yourself talk. you post as if you are "all knowing" and "im right youre wrong" . if im not mistaken-the original question was to get different OPINIONS on what people thought of homosexuality. it seems like all the animal talk is a way of avoiding the subject. just have an opinion already.......PLEASE!

I didn't see any actual proof in that post about the evolutionary benefits of homosexuality in a population. I saw inferences, and a few educated guesses. But all this involves reasoning, not proof. Just don't use the word proof when it isn't actual proof.
unfortunately for you, it is based on conclusive proof. the mathematics are pretty intimidating, and you need to have a background in selection modeling, but i will try to bust out the experiment with dolphins if i can find the proof.

feel free to actually look some of this stuff up, though...it's in my intro evolution text book, so you shouldn't have any trouble finding it. the proven fact is that homosexuality IS evolutionarily stable in many species, including the primate species that most closely resembles humans. whether you think it is the right solution for humans brings in the issue of morality, but does not relate at all to the science of the situation.

are you joking? the majority of individuals on this planet never reproduce? you sound way too intelligent in previous posts to make a comment such as that. reproduction is what makes the world go 'round. in every aspect. plant, animal, human.

what is your goal in life? happiness of yourself? happiness of your fellow man? world peace? whatever it is, producing MORE children isn't exactly an important factor. If you want to impact the youth, be a teacher - you'll do it better. If you want to change the world, be a writer or a lobbeyist or politician. If you want to be personally happy by caring for children - adopt, there are kids starving on the streets in any number of countries. gravity is what makes the world go round, deary, reproduction is a side effect.

Well, in all my arguings today, I came to this conclusion:

Everything is a sin, according to the Christian Bible. Everybody sins. Is there evidence in the Christian Bible that homosexuality is wrong? Of course, but just a small bit. One of the pieces of evidence was a letter Paul wrote to the Corinthians. Apparently, what Paul wrote is what God wanted (which is b.s.). The other piece of evidence of sodomy (not necessarily homosexuality) is Sodom. God destroyed the city because the people there participated in homosexual acts (and prostitution, sex, gambling, etc).

Since Republicans think homosexuality is their business, they want to outlaw it. Yet, they have no problem with legalized gambling, legalized prostitution, or legalized strip clubs (which all these go against the Bible). :rolleyes:

Since homosexuality comes down to being wrong for religious reasons, the state and federal government has NO right to get involved. True, the Constitution doesn't specifically say "there shall be a separation of church and state", but, the First Amendment does say "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", meaning, the federal government must not get involved in religion. Plain, simple, and clear as day.

And on top of that, not everyone is a Christian. Heck, a lot of people are atheists. So why should homosexual atheists follow Christian law?

i didn't read that particular article at all, because i have read dozens of others and already know the scoop.

1) it is a very good idea to use animal models when discussing evolutionary possibilities, since humans are animals and must follow the same laws of selection that all other life follows. if homosexuality is shown to be an evolutionarily valid solution, then it cannot logically be argued that being gay is wrong because it is unnatural; what nature designs is natural, and therefore people need to find a different reason to say gay=immoral.
2) whether or not an action is "moral" is very different than whether or not it is evolutionarily stable. infanticide is not evolutionarily stable for humans, but it is for other animals. i'm not trying to make claims about "morality," since i believe morality is purely subjective, i am simply responding to the claim that homosexuality is immoral because it is not evolutionarily valid.
3) there are some very very specific conclusions about animal homosexuality, including the proven fact that it is often an evolutionarily sound strategy...that means that for many species it is just as advantageous to be in a homosexual "relationship" as it is to be in a heterosexual relationship.

Well, I assumed you were arguing just because its natural in animals must mean its perfectly alirght for us. And even homosexuality is beneficial for some animals doesn't automatically make it so for humans.

i dont think youll see ants, bees, dolphins, apes and whatever else in a gay bar. we are talking about is homosexuality wrong. you are simply trying to give us a re cap of an episode of animal planet, and personally-i think you just like to hear/see yourself talk. you post as if you are "all knowing" and "im right youre wrong" . if im not mistaken-the original question was to get different OPINIONS on what people thought of homosexuality. it seems like all the animal talk is a way of avoiding the subject. just have an opinion already.......PLEASE!

my post was in response to claims that homosexuality is unnatural, or that homosexuality goes against nature. that is false, and proven to be false. whether or not you think homosexuality is wrong for moral reasons is an entirely different argument, and there can be no empirical proof of that, so i focus on the issues for which there is objective evidence. homosexuality IS natural, and in many species it IS an evolutionarily stable solution. you may think it is wrong for humans to engage in it, and that is your choice, but you cannot rightfully claim that homosexuality is unnatural.

Well, I assumed you were arguing just because its natural in animals must mean its perfectly alirght for us. And even homosexuality is beneficial for some animals doesn't automatically make it so for humans.
i never claimed either of those things. please read my posts before jumping to conclusions, it will save time.

darling, have you ever watched the discovery channel? they have a "queen", in the case of bees they actually make EVERY other female in the group sterile. same with termites, ants, wasps, etc. I'm not saying that what bugs do is any sort of moral precident, but reproduction is NOT allways the only reason for individuals to exist, and again, most individuals have existed to improve the function of society as a whole, not to actually make it larger. Look at your own body - how much of it is devoted to sex, versus defense, transportation, thought, etc? the most successful biological entities are those that don't reproduce as individuals, but those who work together for the good of the whole. Again, using animals as moral precidents is stupid, but so is saying that the world goes round by INDIVIDUAL reproduction - it doesn't.

I obviously watch discovery more than you. and i did not say that reproduction is always the only reason for individuals to exist....you must be referring to someone elses post. i wasnt talking about insects -i was talking symbolically. and the flaw in the post earlier is that it was stated that "most of the worlds population or individuals or most of the world (i cant remember the exact post now) were social insects. and im saying that that isnt true.

I beleive if some deity controls society, that GLBT people were designed to further support the society that allready exists, and especially to hold high positions in intellectual and spiritual matters - as they, ideally, can have the strengths of both sexes and the drawbacks of neither. Virility without chauvenism - intution without vanity. A lesbian woman is an empowered woman. A gay man is a sensitive man. Power and delicacy combined are the pinacle of all virtue, and I beleive that GLBT people have the charactoristics to be pillars of society - as they often were in non-patriarchal places. Homosexuality is in no ways a sin, it is a blessing, if not a calling. Now, obviously this doesn't apply to all GLBT people, there are plenty who are as stupid as the next one, but on average, I think the instances of intellectuals and spiritualists are much higher in the gay crowd.

Okay, you are being an essentialist here. GLBT individuals arent more likely to be spiritual or intelligent or secure by nature. They are JUST REGULAR PEOPLE. Your normalization of them and essentialization of what it means to be gay is just as bad as those who decry homosexuality a 'disorder' or morally wrong. The only reason why what your saying might be true is that people who are OPENLY GLBT might be more likely to be open wiht their feelings/empowered, jot becuase of their sexual orientation, but because they already ahd that stregnth and thats why theyre out in the first place.

i never claimed either of those things. please read my posts before jumping to conclusions, it will save time.

Not really, it probably would have taken me more time to read all those posts. Plus I'm lazy :D

I personally have nothing against gay people and have actually been friends with homosexuals before. However, my opinion on them might be interpreted as "anti-gay."
Here's what I think:
I think homosexuality is a minor mental disorder. My reasoning is due to the fact that they can't reproduce and the purpose of being alive is to keep your species alive, usually by means of reproduction. Should they be discriminated against just because of their "mental disorder." Definitely not. That would be like discriminating people who suffer from depression, because after all it can be considered a mental disorder.
Homosexuals deserve equal treatment and it is outrageous that marriage between them is not allowed. Just because you have different sexual preferences doesn't mean you should hate people who do. That would be like hating people who like pickles because you don't.
Absolutely ridiculous.
While this may be true of "life" in general, it is not true of individual life-forms.

A human is not driven by the need to reproduce; we are driven by the need to *separate* ourselves from nature, by elevating our cerebral and spiritual functions above the baser natural bodily functions.

i dont think youll see ants, bees, dolphins, apes and whatever else in a gay bar. we are talking about is homosexuality wrong. you are simply trying to give us a re cap of an episode of animal planet, and personally-i think you just like to hear/see yourself talk. you post as if you are "all knowing" and "im right youre wrong" . if im not mistaken-the original question was to get different OPINIONS on what people thought of homosexuality. it seems like all the animal talk is a way of avoiding the subject. just have an opinion already.......PLEASE!

like he allready said, he was responding to the statement that it was not evolutionarily viable to form homosexual relationships. chill out, if you don't care about what he's posting them don't comment on it, but it was perfectly relevant.

what is your goal in life? happiness of yourself? happiness of your fellow man? world peace? whatever it is, producing MORE children isn't exactly an important factor. If you want to impact the youth, be a teacher - you'll do it better. If you want to change the world, be a writer or a lobbeyist or politician. If you want to be personally happy by caring for children - adopt, there are kids starving on the streets in any number of countries. gravity is what makes the world go round, deary, reproduction is a side effect.


im not deliberately trying to argue with you, so i hope we are still in the discussion stage. my post earlier spoke of reproduction by human, plant and amimal. not just humans. of course the goal isnt just to increase the population. i was simply defending the purpose of reproduction. we reproduce to replenish the supply that is depleted over time. whether that be man, cow, chicken, soybeans, whatever.

like he allready said, he was responding to the statement that it was not evolutionarily viable to form homosexual relationships. chill out, if you don't care about what he's posting them don't comment on it, but it was perfectly relevant.

he already responded to my post, so theres no need for you to be redundant.

I obviously watch discovery more than you. and i did not say that reproduction is always the only reason for individuals to exist....you must be referring to someone elses post. i wasnt talking about insects -i was talking symbolically. and the flaw in the post earlier is that it was stated that "most of the worlds population or individuals or most of the world (i cant remember the exact post now) were social insects. and im saying that that isnt true.

there are more individual ants in my city then there are humans in the entire world. There are more individual social insects than there are individuals of all other species combined. I'm pretty sure that's correct, but I don't care to look it up as it's only a sidetrack from the moral argument...in fact it's a sidetrack to a sidetrack....whatever.

that "most of the worlds population or individuals or most of the world (i cant remember the exact post now) were social insects. and im saying that that isnt true.
i should have been more precise with my phrasing; most of the world's biomass is composed of life that does not sexually reproduce in the manner we consider analagous to humans. if you want to look specifically at animal biomass, here are some interesting insect fun facts:

-1 in 4 animals is a beetle.
-10% of the world's biomass is ants
-20% of the identified animal biomass on Earth is social insects, but it is predicted that roughly 70% of the unidentified species are insects that might qualify as social

given the ratio of ant mass to, say, human mass, or even to beetle mass, this means that the number of social insects on the planet today is ridiculously greater than the number of mammals, reptiles, birds, amphibians, and fish combined.

he already responded to my post, so theres no need for you to be redundant.

he posted his while I was writing mine, sorry.

i should have been more precise with my phrasing; most of the world's biomass is composed of life that does not sexually reproduce in the manner we consider analagous to humans. if you want to look specifically at animal biomass, here are some interesting insect fun facts:

-1 in 4 animals is a beetle.
-10% of the world's biomass is ants
-20% of the identified animal biomass on Earth is social insects, but it is predicted that roughly 70% of the unidentified species are insects that might qualify as social

given the ratio of ant mass to, say, human mass, or even to beetle mass, this means that the number of social insects on the planet today is ridiculously greater than the number of mammals, reptiles, birds, amphibians, and fish combined.

hurrah! that would, however, make him incorrect.

some animals, like a type of frog, can change sex when in a population that is overly one-gender dominent. If they are female, they first change their voices deeper, then more steps until they are able to produce sperm.

Are they homosexuals?

Other animals dont even have gender

(this information comes from Jurassic Park... so i dunno)

Not really, it probably would have taken me more time to read all those posts. Plus I'm lazy :D
hahaha, true, i am somewhat long-winded. i probably wouldn't bother to read my posts, either...i like it when people just drop the one-sentence bombs like "GAYS ARE GOING TO HELL!!!" or "DEATH TO ALL THE BREEDERS!!!"

whether we all agree or not, ill say this....this is an intelligent collection of people here. how refreshing to leave a messaging forum and have actually learned something. sure beats the old porn bot advertisements and constant annoyance oF " ASL?"

sorry-that was off subject.....back to the birds and the bees

some animals, like a type of frog, can change sex when in a population that is overly one-gender dominent. If they are female, they first change their voices deeper, then more steps until they are able to produce sperm.

Are they homosexuals?

Other animals dont even have gender

(this information comes from Jurassic Park... so i dunno)
haha, Jurassic Park actually was telling the truth; there are certain species of frogs that make a gender change when necessary. they aren't homosexuals because they still will only mate with members of the opposite sex, but i suppose we would consider them "transexuals"...it's hard to compare frog behavior in this area to human labels, since we can't (yet) change our gender at will.

Okay, you are being an essentialist here. GLBT individuals arent more likely to be spiritual or intelligent or secure by nature. They are JUST REGULAR PEOPLE. Your normalization of them and essentialization of what it means to be gay is just as bad as those who decry homosexuality a 'disorder' or morally wrong. The only reason why what your saying might be true is that people who are OPENLY GLBT might be more likely to be open wiht their feelings/empowered, jot becuase of their sexual orientation, but because they already ahd that stregnth and thats why theyre out in the first place.

good point. but in tribal societies there's still a high instance of gay shamanism. I'm not saying we're superior or anything, just that IF (key word) there's a deity who makes people what they are, then it probably intended that. That's a native american and pagan idea - not necessarily my own. And celibrating the strengths of a downtrodden and abused minority is not as bad as doing the abuse, in my opinion. The majority of GLBT people are still as shallow and materialistic as the rest, but I personally have observed that there is a larger minority within the GLBT of spiritual people and intellectuals. Maybe it's a local thing - but one of the most talented artists I know, is gay, and is NOT openly gay, and is terrified of becoming so. It's not just those who are "out".

haha, Jurassic Park actually was telling the truth; there are certain species of frogs that make a gender change when necessary. they aren't homosexuals because they still will only mate with members of the opposite sex, but i suppose we would consider them "transexuals"...it's hard to compare frog behavior in this area to human labels, since we can't (yet) change our gender at will.


thatd make for an excellent super hero though

we can't (yet) change our gender at will.

oh...for the day...*sigh*

thatd make for an excellent super hero though
Sheman? or Hewoman?

thatd make for an excellent super hero though
activate super-genetalia! deploy secondary sex characteristics...with a vengeance!

* singing to the Heman cartoon theme *

Sheman!
Do dodo do doDO doo

Okay, you are being an essentialist here. GLBT individuals arent more likely to be spiritual or intelligent or secure by nature. They are JUST REGULAR PEOPLE. Your normalization of them and essentialization of what it means to be gay is just as bad as those who decry homosexuality a 'disorder' or morally wrong. The only reason why what your saying might be true is that people who are OPENLY GLBT might be more likely to be open wiht their feelings/empowered, jot becuase of their sexual orientation, but because they already ahd that stregnth and thats why theyre out in the first place.

also, take a look at the 20 or so most intellectually important people in western civilization. I bet you at least 25%, AT LEAST, were gay or bi. socrates, plato, davinchi - you've got to admit there's a markedly large instance of homosexuals in the intellectual community - though by and large homosexuals (like all other people) remain morons. I wouldn't be caught dead in a gay bar.

Scientifically speaking, it makes no sense for any species to have homosexuals. This defeats the purpose of the life-cycle (reproduction). That's why it is sometimes referred to as a 'disorder'. Not meant to be derogatory (least by majority of people I know), but yeah.

Anywho ... little fact.

The word LESBIAN came from the Isle of Lesbos (use an atlas). There was a large concentration of homosexual women there back in the days of the Roman Empire (or shortly thereafter), and thus the term was coined.

I wouldn't be caught dead in a gay bar.
depends on the bar. most gay bars, like most straight bars, are worthless. but there is a Gay 90s near my old place that was awesome; it wasn't technically a gay bar any more, because it was flat out the best bar/club around, and straight people would go there all the time. the drag show was awesome, since the contestants actually had talents beyond dressing up like the opposite gender, and the bartenders would perform Broadway hits as an ensemble while they were working...it was a really keen place.

but yeah, most gay bars i have been to have been really tacky. they tend to focus too much on being GAY bars; a straight bar would be equally silly if they focused entirely on being STRAIGHT instead of just focusing on being a bar.

(Wonders in in a bright green robe and bows) Hello My Children! Do What You Feel Is Right In Your Hearts, You Will Find The Truth!

Scientifically speaking, it makes no sense for any species to have homosexuals. This defeats the purpose of the life-cycle (reproduction). That's why it is sometimes referred to as a 'disorder'. Not meant to be derogatory (least by majority of people I know), but yeah.

OH MY GOD. please read my earlier posts, i really cannot stand having to repeat my arguments only ONE PAGE later. your "point" is refuted, move on with your life.

goodnight all you homosexual and heterosexual people. blessings to all.

I'm Irish (and by extension almost automatically ctholic even though I'm not anymore) and bisexual. What the Catholics (God kill the pope) have taught me and many others since birth is that if you have sexual urges those are unnnatural, if you love (and I mean carnal and beyond) someone of the same gender that is unnatural and you're are going to Hell. Now think how I felt when I found myself looking at everyone! I was so afraid but then I rationalized why would God's messengers say something wrong if God made people like that. Eh? Do I raise a good point or what?

Okay the point sucks.

Okay the point sucks.


your point doesnt suck dear.its a struggle im sure when you factor religious influence into the matter.

goodnight all you homosexual and heterosexual people. blessings to all.
Discrimination against bisexuals, transsexuals, intersexuals, omnisexuals, protosexuals, subsexuals, parasexuals, quasisexuals and phantasmosexuals. Ok, so the majority of that list doesnt even exist, but it is badto say "heterosexuals and homosexuals" when you mean everyone here. Technically, humans are bisexuals. Just that some are a lil more homo than others ;)

Homosexuality is not just sex male-male, female-female. Homosexuality is a *relationship*. It is limited to humans, not the animal kingdom. Ony humans form relationships that recognize (and cherish) the gender of the other.

Homosexuality is not just sex male-male, female-female. Homosexuality is a *relationship*. It is limited to humans, not the animal kingdom. Ony humans form relationships that recognize (and cherish) the gender of the other.
Wrong. Debunked earlier in the thread. Search for penguins. Or dolphins if you like. And with that I mean the limitation to humans.

Discrimination against bisexuals, transsexuals, intersexuals, omnisexuals, protosexuals, subsexuals, parasexuals, quasisexuals and phantasmosexuals. Ok, so the majority of that list doesnt even exist, but it is badto say "heterosexuals and homosexuals" when you mean everyone here. Technically, humans are bisexuals. Just that some are a lil more homo than others ;)


aww...i was only being my usual sarcastic,funny self (i thought)

aww...i was only being my usual sarcastic,funny self (i thought)
I know.Thus why I answered jokingly :)

Wrong. Debunked earlier in the thread. Search for penguins. Or dolphins if you like. And with that I mean the limitation to humans.
Okay, prove to me they have relationships and the capcity to recognize a gender-gender relationship.
EDIT: my point is that only humans recognize a relationship, and a gender-gender relationship at that.

someone told me once that they knew this guy from highschool who was gay. he had a bad car accident and was in a coma for 2 months. when he woke, he remembered evryone, his family, friends, etc. but when he got home, he was shocked to find out he was gay. he remembered his boyfriend and everything....but decided he was not infact gay anymore. anyone got any thoughts on that one? (i thought i was going to bed...<yawns>)

Okay, prove to me they have relationships and the capcity to recognize a gender-gender relationship.
they engage in long-standing pair bonds, often bonds which extend through mating seasons. in cases such as bottlenose dolphins, homosexual lifetime pair bonds are frequently observed, even though NO heterosexual life bonds have been observed. as much as any animal is able to have a relationship, these animals show homosexual relationships.

now, you could argue that no animal is able to have a relationship at all, but that would mean that all the evidence for heterosexuality being "natural" would be refuted by your own argument; if sexuality is about the relationship, and no animal can have a relationship, then there is no evidence that heterosexuality is natural because it could not, by definition, be found in nature (other than in humans, where it might be artificial).

they engage in long-standing pair bonds, often bonds which extend through mating seasons. in cases such as bottlenose dolphins, homosexual lifetime pair bonds are frequently observed, even though NO heterosexual life bonds have been observed. as much as any animal is able to have a relationship, these animals show homosexual relationships.

now, you could argue that no animal is able to have a relationship at all, but that would mean that all the evidence for heterosexuality being "natural" would be refuted by your own argument; if sexuality is about the relationship, and no animal can have a relationship, then there is no evidence that heterosexuality is natural because it could not, by definition, be found in nature (other than in humans, where it might be artificial).

now those dolphins could have just been friends for all we know

now those dolphins could have just been friends for all we know
sure, they are just "friends" who have sexual contact and live together ;).

sure, they are just "friends" who have sexual contact and live together ;).
I wish I had more friends like that. Accept for the living thing. Small house and still in school.

As ever, Bottle makes her point well and eloquently. For those who are not too lazy to read more than two paragraphs, this link might be useful. As for the morality argument, only humans get enmeshed in such concepts.

http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm

"There's clearly a wide range of homosexual behaviors in the animal kingdom. It's widespread, common and impossible to deny or explain away any longer. Homosexuality is natural as green grass in summer, and it's high time we accepted that fact.

The birds do it. It's been described in 130 species of birds. The southeastern blueberry bees do it. Same sex pairs of animals kiss and caress each other with obvious affection and tenderness. Male pairs and female pairs form long-lasting pair-bonds and reject, threaten, even fight off potential opposite sex partners when they are presented with them. Same sex partners engage in almost every conceivable means of sexual expression throughout the animal kingdom.

It's high time we quit criminalizing something that is so normal, so natural, so harmless and so common among animals and recognize that what we call "sodomy" is really quite natural after all.

We're animals. And being animals, we should quit trying to pretend that we're not. What we call a "crime against nature" isn't unnatural, and it shouldn't be a crime"

I wish I had more friends like that. Accept for the living thing. Small house and still in school.

lol @ camel.....and sorry for calling bottle "he" earlier. i shouldnt have assigned gender simply by way of text

"Camel Eaters" There actually pretty tasty :) I had a piece of one in dubai tastes like lamb more than chicken lol

[B][I]Ok so is homosexuality actually "wrong." you tell me. And dont give me any of this "there is no absolute truth, do whats 'right' to you" crap. I want an intellegent answer from someone out there.


is all i want to say isthat i dont hate gay ppl but they need to not get married and become more of a part in are country thats wrong(GAY marrage)
It is only between man and women not women and women or man and man
how sick and wrong
im just glad i live in Missouri and in St. Charles County where it is 100% BANNNNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lol @ camel.....and sorry for calling bottle "he" earlier. i shouldnt have assigned gender simply by way of text
no prob, i don't consider it an insult to be refered to with the male pronoun because i don't consider maleness to be a bad thing. now, if you saw me in person and said i looked mannish i might have my feelings hurt, but implying that i type like a man doesn't really bug me :).

[B][I]


is all i want to say isthat i dont hate gay ppl but they need to not get married and become more of a part in are country thats wrong(GAY marrage)
It is only between man and women not women and women or man and man
how sick and wrong
im just glad i live in Missouri and in St. Charles County where it is 100% BANNNNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
this has GOT to be a parody. it's just too perfect not to be one.

[B][I]


is all i want to say isthat i dont hate gay ppl but they need to not get married and become more of a part in are country thats wrong(GAY marrage)
It is only between man and women not women and women or man and man
how sick and wrong
im just glad i live in Missouri and in St. Charles County where it is 100% BANNNNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ha! i could barely read that "paragraph" if it qualifies as one. what the heck

they engage in long-standing pair bonds, often bonds which extend through mating seasons. in cases such as bottlenose dolphins, homosexual lifetime pair bonds are frequently observed, even though NO heterosexual life bonds have been observed. as much as any animal is able to have a relationship, these animals show homosexual relationships.

now, you could argue that no animal is able to have a relationship at all, but that would mean that all the evidence for heterosexuality being "natural" would be refuted by your own argument; if sexuality is about the relationship, and no animal can have a relationship, then there is no evidence that heterosexuality is natural because it could not, by definition, be found in nature (other than in humans, where it might be artificial).
They have relationships; we recognize that. But that says nothing about the animal's capacity to recognize its relationsihp. In other words, it takes a sentient consciousness and an ability to recognize "Hey! this guy I'm in love with is another guy like me!" I don't believe animals do that. They don't recognize homosexuality. Only we do.

is all i want to say isthat i dont hate gay ppl but they need to not get married and become more of a part in are country thats wrong(GAY marrage)
It is only between man and women not women and women or man and man
how sick and wrong
im just glad i live in Missouri and in St. Charles County where it is 100% BANNNNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Marraige is not just between one man and one women, or even between males and female, or females and male. Marraige also occurs between females and between males. It's a fact, deal with it.

[B][I]


is all i want to say isthat i dont hate gay ppl but they need to not get married and become more of a part in are country thats wrong(GAY marrage)
It is only between man and women not women and women or man and man
how sick and wrong
im just glad i live in Missouri and in St. Charles County where it is 100% BANNNNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You know, I first looked at this and thought - this must be a joke, no one would really write like that, except as a joke.

But then I figured, no wait, a ignorant moron would.... So I guess it's not a joke. Sigh...

There has been a study lately on the idea that homosexuality is actualy animal instincts. It has been documented that in the wild, homosexuality is actualy more common that with humans. This study threw shockwaves through society. Homosexuality is then seen as a normal day to day feeling. Dont get me wrong, I'm not a homosexual but i believe that if one man loves another man (or woman with woman) good for them. It shouldn't be termed as an illness or something wrong with them in society. It should be seen as a joining of two people that arent ashamed to feel more.

"Dont get me wrong, I'm not a homosexual"

i find it very strange and sad that you feel the need to state this.

They have relationships; we recgonize that. But that says nothing about the animal's capacity to recognize its relationsihp. In other words, it takes a sentient consciousness and an ability to recognize "Hey! this guy I'm in love with is another guy like me!" I don't believe animals do that.

Well try reading the link I just posted. How else would you describe two male birds mating for life and chasing off opposite sex contenders? I think you underate the intelligence of animals.

They have relationships; we recognize that. But that says nothing about the animal's capacity to recognize its relationsihp. In other words, it takes a sentient consciousness and an ability to recognize "Hey! this guy I'm in love with is another guy like me!" I don't believe animals do that. They don't recognize homosexuality. Only we do.
What has love got to do with it. We have no way of knowing if animals all 'love' or not. Heck we cant even define objectively what exactly love is, is love doing the dishes when it's not your turn? Does that mean people with paid 'help' who never do dishes cant love or dont love?
Relationship is merely a generalised word that describes connections. I suggest if an animal constantly seeks out another in preference to others, that not only does this constitute a relationship (since any linkage constitutes a relationship), but proves that the animal recognises it's own preference. You cannot pursue a preference you are not aware of. Further to suggest that animals cannot differentiate the sex of their own kind and even of those not of their own kind is nonesense. My cat knows the difference between human males and females and certainly can tell the difference between males and females within it's own species.

i dont think youll see ants, bees, dolphins, apes and whatever else in a gay bar. we are talking about is homosexuality wrong. you are simply trying to give us a re cap of an episode of animal planet, and personally-i think you just like to hear/see yourself talk. you post as if you are "all knowing" and "im right youre wrong" . if im not mistaken-the original question was to get different OPINIONS on what people thought of homosexuality. it seems like all the animal talk is a way of avoiding the subject. just have an opinion already.......PLEASE!

Sorry lad,

The animal talk takes away one HUGE argument for the moralists. It is not natural The fact that it occurs in nature defeats the claim that it is simply a "deviant" choice.

I'll handle the ape aspects and my "learnun" doesn't come from TV....

if i'm not mistaken, some animals in zoos have been seen showing homosexual behavior....i'll see if i can find a link, but don't get any hopes up.

I'm sure it's been done, but I'll do it anyways.

A list of animals demonstrating homosexual behavior:

Mice
Rats
Guineau Pigs
Dogs
Cats
Cattle
Giraffes
Dolphins
Whales
Walruses
Flamincos
Apes of all types
Grouse
Elephants
Hummingbirds
Some types of woodpecker (and gay mating dances can be very elaborate and quite separate from heterosexual ones)
Lizards (of course whiptail lizards are all female, but they do hump)
Bighorn sheep (which have transexuals, interestingly enough)
Human beings

Ok, that's all I can think of right now. I may get the research out and add more later, though.,

As a devote catholic, i agree that any form of homosexual activity is wrong and also that they will all burn in hell (san fransisco).

thank you. see you there.

As a devote catholic, i agree that any form of homosexual activity is wrong and also that they will all burn in hell (san fransisco).
As a devout athiest, I agree that any form of religion is wrong and also that they will all burn in the void.



...not really, but you must admit simplistic and blind statements like that are rather ridiculous.

As a devote catholic, i agree that any form of homosexual activity is wrong and also that they will all burn in hell (san fransisco).
Read my post.

As a devote catholic, i agree that any form of homosexual activity is wrong and also that they will all burn in hell (san fransisco).

As a devout Catholic, I apologise to others for your weak attempts to sound morally superior just because you belong to a particular religion.

If homosexual intercourse is such a drastic sin, you'd think Jesus would have specifically talked about it. What Jesus did teach was to "love one another as I have loved you". I find it appalling when people highlight some teachings of the Bible while ignoring others, just so they can find Biblical justifications for their hateful attitudes.

Its natural in every species to feel attraction to a person of the same sex i'm not talking about only humans i'm also talking about animals too if as for my nation i neutral on the subject but thats one way to cut down on the population problem. :cool:

Can somebody please tell me why people are so obsessed with trying to find something right or wrong about homosexuality! No matter what you think or feel or have been taught, its there. it exists. And NO ONE is asking you to be one. So live and let live. Why is that hard? Where does it say that it is one mans job to judge the morality of another man's life. Live your life in the moral manner you see fit, and that does not include what you see fit for everybody else. I'll get off my soapbox now, taking a deep breath...and im calm. :D

Look they ain't hurting anybody so let 'em at it.

I'm not gay or anything, but I imagine that a guy taking it in the ass would be in pain.

No. Actually it feels good. Really really good with the right amount of lube...

No. Actually it feels good. Really really good with the right amount of lube...


you cracked me up, and my bleeding workmates are looking at me like i'm nuts. thanks for that.

I wasn't kidding it does. I'm also glad I could make you laugh.

I wasn't kidding it does. I'm also glad I could make you laugh.

i didn't think you were kidding, honey.

and most of this discussion has been thouroughly depressing. you are a shining beacon in the darkness of people who spend most of their time worrying about what other people do when they should be taking a close look at themselves.

Well try reading the link I just posted. How else would you describe two male birds mating for life and chasing off opposite sex contenders? I think you underate the intelligence of animals.
This is all right and fine, but it says nothing about what the animals might be feeling and thinking.

Why must we do battle with the virgins? Can't we just convert them?

Why must we do battle with the virgins? Can't we just convert them?

it is not literal virgins. i am the goddess of the fiighting virgins, and we are virgins of spirit and mind - if not of body

it is not literal virgins. i am the goddess of the fiighting virgins, and we are virgins of spirit and mind - if not of body
From reading you I wouldn't think body either.

What has love got to do with it. We have no way of knowing if animals all 'love' or not. Heck we cant even define objectively what exactly love is, is love doing the dishes when it's not your turn? Does that mean people with paid 'help' who never do dishes cant love or dont love?
Relationship is merely a generalised word that describes connections. I suggest if an animal constantly seeks out another in preference to others, that not only does this constitute a relationship (since any linkage constitutes a relationship), but proves that the animal recognises it's own preference. You cannot pursue a preference you are not aware of. Further to suggest that animals cannot differentiate the sex of their own kind and even of those not of their own kind is nonesense. My cat knows the difference between human males and females and certainly can tell the difference between males and females within it's own species.
"Relationship" involves emotional connections, and a mental capacity to abstract "two as one".

Two people in relationship think of themselves as "us", not as "me".

You know what I don't give a damn. Just stay out of people's bedrooms are come into mine... If you have the equipment needed,

This is all right and fine, but it says nothing about what the animals might be feeling and thinking.

Why does it matter what the animals are feeling and thinking? They show an obvious preference for the same, rather than the opposite gender (often, in studies, even when presented with mates of both genders). Thus, the attraction to same-gendered animals is natural. That is all the point people are trying to make with that.


Now: my opinion on the issue. I think human beings are naturally attracted to human beings. Sexuality exists along a spectrum. A variety of factors, including (but not limited to) genetics, hormones, socialization, etc. causes people to fall somewhere along that spectrum. Some people are 99.9999% attracted to the opposite gender (or the same gender). Some people fall more like 80/20. Others are close to 50/50.

And before I get any crap about how that means everybody should consider themselves bisexual - do remember that there are other distributions than just the normal one. This could very well be a biphasic distribution.

And, if anyone is interested in knowing, I fall somewhere on line closer to hetero, but not all the way. I am maybe 75% attracted to the male gender and 25% attracted to females. Of course, I am in a committed relationship with a male, so I really just mention attraction to females at this point cuz it makes him smile. =)

From reading you I wouldn't think body either.

what is this world coming to? flirting with a gay man online whilst Willamena champions the cause of the downtrodden on her own?
you have gotta love random beauty.

what is this world coming to? flirting with a gay man online whilst Willamena champions the cause of the downtrodden on her own?
you have gotta love random beauty.
Not gay bi. I screw everyone equally.

and it doesn't really look like there are many straight people left in this chat to be honest, so why are we discussing with the happily queer on our own?

Way to go Willamena. Oh yeah, do the fast typing thing. Oh yeah.

Not gay bi. I screw everyone equally.

i feel honoured........ to see that equality of the sexes has won in your world.

and it doesn't really look like there are many straight people left in this chat to be honest, so why are we discussing with the happily queer on our own?
Because we're fun to talk to!!! DUH

and it doesn't really look like there are many straight people left in this chat to be honest, so why are we discussing with the happily queer on our own?

I'm straight. Well, mostly. =)

I'm straight. Well, mostly. =)
Yeah but you've not said much have ye' :)

i think i just got confirmed, we're all queer in one way or another.

50/50 How were you confimed? Catholic? That would be more interesting than me.

50/50 How were you confimed? Catholic? That would be more interesting than me.

actually, in the humanist society - i was young, foolish and making a statement.

:fluffle: i think i just got confirmed, we're all queer in one way or another. :fluffle:
:fluffle:

:fluffle: :fluffle:
:fluffle:

sorry darling, unlike you, i don't go there.
:(

actually, in the humanist society - i was young, foolish and making a statement.
Young foolish and making a statement?
Just to piss you off.
Young? :fluffle: Those fluffles look rather similar.

sorry darling, unlike you, i don't go there.
:(
LOL
Penalty gratuitous use of darling.

Why does it matter what the animals are feeling and thinking? They show an obvious preference for the same, rather than the opposite gender (often, in studies, even when presented with mates of both genders). Thus, the attraction to same-gendered animals is natural. That is all the point people are trying to make with that.
Exactly! It matters because it is only humans who think that feeling and thiinking in terms of an opposite gender is odd in any way.

Young foolish and making a statement?
Just to piss you off.
Young? :fluffle: Those fluffles look rather similar.

i am perplexed.............

though all the kissing is rather pleasant and distracting to watch at the same time

Perplexed how? In order to spite you I called you older than you probally were.

Exactly! It matters because it is only humans who think that feeling and thiinking in terms of an opposite gender is odd in any way.

and we are all now happily in agreement about everything, and my positive disposition will transfer this moment into a huge and momentous experience for the entire human race to behold as an example of true greatness.

What's going to be funny is when some uber ultra conservative reads this tomorrow and freaks out.

Perplexed how? In order to spite you I called you older than you probally were.

well, duh. but what is older than i probably am? there is like no existing concept of age attached to me, and you could think that:
a) i am 14 , so you are really calling me 20
b) i am 40 and you are really calling me 50

hence the perplexed state - not so clear

What has love got to do with it. We have no way of knowing if animals all 'love' or not. Heck we cant even define objectively what exactly love is, is love doing the dishes when it's not your turn? Does that mean people with paid 'help' who never do dishes cant love or dont love?
Relationship is merely a generalised word that describes connections. I suggest if an animal constantly seeks out another in preference to others, that not only does this constitute a relationship (since any linkage constitutes a relationship), but proves that the animal recognises it's own preference. You cannot pursue a preference you are not aware of. Further to suggest that animals cannot differentiate the sex of their own kind and even of those not of their own kind is nonesense. My cat knows the difference between human males and females and certainly can tell the difference between males and females within it's own species.
You cannot pursue a preference you are not aware of. Are animals aware of it? I say no. It is natural.

What's going to be funny is when some uber ultra conservative reads this tomorrow and freaks out.

agreed - and i laugh again./ i can see that look on his/her face

You forget those who are qualified to make a statement because they are directly affected by the hatemongering: Gays!!

Of course being a Homosexual is NOT wrong. How could it be?! It is a form of sexuality, "created" by nature for one reason or another. What I consider wrong is this constant scapegoat mentality always looking for another minority to blame problems on and gays are at an all time high on the popularity list for this, which SUCKS!! How would you feel if suddenly heterosexuality was "deviant" and treated like dirt, discriminated against, outlawed etc? Instead of returning to middle age situations where everything not conforming with catholic religion was condemned and erradicated, mankind should learn to accept each other the way it is.
It's not created by nature, otherwise homosexual couples will have kids. It;s a sexuality that gays CHOOSE, because they want to experiment with stuff.

well, duh. but what is older than i probably am? there is like no existing concept of age attached to me, and you could think that:
a) i am 14 , so you are really calling me 20
b) i am 40 and you are really calling me 50

hence the perplexed state - not so clear
Well you mentioned work. So if they provided you with a computer I would say 25 to 30. So if I were correct in that statement then I would be calling you 35ish or 40.

It's not created by nature, otherwise homosexual couples will have kids. It;s a sexuality that gays CHOOSE, because they want to experiment with stuff.

just go back a few pages and certify that your argument has already been quashed, slandered and disproven. i'm stooopififed.

It's not created by nature, otherwise homosexual couples will have kids. It;s a sexuality that gays CHOOSE, because they want to experiment with stuff.
Expirement with stuff? LOL you are a hoot.

not just in zoos. animals have been frequently observed to show homosexual behaviors. animals like kangaroos, songbirds, giraffes, goats, sheep, mice, penguins, and large cats make the list, both in captivity and in the wild. bottlenose dolphins never form life-long heterosexual pairs, but they have been observed to for homosexual pairings that are only briefly interupted by the mating season. bonobo chimpanzees, our closest genetic relatives, are entirely bisexual, and lesbian intercourse is MORE COMMON among them than any form of heterosexual contact.
That's because they have been observing homo zookeepers.
And the fact that animals do it, doesn't make it any right.

Also, some people say they are born gay; however, there are studies showing that some people are born with increased violence, which can be twisted to be that some people are born killers. So do we pardon murder because of this? Noooo! Even if there is some homosexual tendencies through a defect in DNA, you still have to repress it, and live a normal hetero life. Just like a murderer has to repress violence.

Well you mentioned work. So if they provided you with a computer I would say 25 to 30. So if I were correct in that statement then I would be calling you 35ish or 40.

people don't get computers at work if they are not within the 25 -30 range?

That's because they have been observing homo zookeepers.
And the fact that animals do it, doesn't make it any right.

Also, some people say they are born gay; however, there are studies showing that some people are born with increased violence, which can be twisted to be that some people are born killers. So do we pardon murder because of this? Noooo! Even if there is some homosexual tendencies through a defect in DNA, you still have to repress it, and live a normal hetero life. Just like a murderer has to repress violence.

this is just a joke, i know it. hiding some repressed feelings there are we? is that why we are so full of doom?

That's because they have been observing homo zookeepers.
And the fact that animals do it, doesn't make it any right.

Also, some people say they are born gay; however, there are studies showing that some people are born with increased violence, which can be twisted to be that some people are born killers. So do we pardon murder because of this? Noooo! Even if there is some homosexual tendencies through a defect in DNA, you still have to repress it, and live a normal hetero life. Just like a murderer has to repress violence.
Defect? Normal? Hey Fighting Virgins I think we found are uber ultra conservative.

people don't get computers at work if they are not within the 25 -30 range?
I figured with the way you spoke you would be within that range. Too

Marraige is not just between one man and one women, or even between males and female, or females and male. Marraige also occurs between females and between males. It's a fact, deal with it.
Marriage is a form of creating a family in order to bring up kids. With a homo couple... what kids????

Marriage is a form of creating a family in order to bring up kids. With a homo couple... what kids????
Oh just some orphans that wouldn't have gotten a better family otherwise. You know because hetero parents are always the best.

That's because they have been observing homo zookeepers.

And all the ones in the wild?

And the fact that animals do it, doesn't make it any right.

Perhaps, but it does make it natural.

Also, some people say they are born gay; however, there are studies showing that some people are born with increased violence, which can be twisted to be that some people are born killers. So do we pardon murder because of this? Noooo! Even if there is some homosexual tendencies through a defect in DNA, you still have to repress it, and live a normal hetero life. Just like a murderer has to repress violence.

Huge different here - homosexuality hurts no one. Murder quite obviously does.

orphans should get in a straight family, where they wouldn't be constantly disturbed with the strange sexuality of fathers. Just imagine coming to JHS, and saying: yea, my dad has sex with men...

Marriage is also a way of showing one's love and appreciation towards another human being. Plus there are 6 billion people in the world. Even though I would like to settle down have a family your point sucks.

Marriage is a form of creating a family in order to bring up kids. With a homo couple... what kids????

Marriage as a civil institution was never all about kids, nor is it now.

[QUOTE=Doom777]Marriage is a form of creating a family in order to bring up kids. With a homo couple... what kids????[/QUOTE

ditto camel eaters

also, scuse me. sperm bank. turkey baster.

Defect? Normal? Hey Fighting Virgins I think we found are uber ultra conservative.
I am not uber conservative... except on the issues of homosexuality and masturbation. I link the second one to the first, you see...

orphans should get in a straight family, where they wouldn't be constantly disturbed with the strange sexuality of fathers. Just imagine coming to JHS, and saying: yea, my dad has sex with men...

You guys were wrong - not an uber conservative really. This guy is just a general idiot.

Defect? Normal? Hey Fighting Virgins I think we found are uber ultra conservative.

he's just trying to wind the queers up (also, notice how all gays are automatically male in his world)

Marriage as a civil institution was never all about kids, nor is it now.
marriage is ultimately about creating a family, and a family is ultimately about having kids.

Why does it matter what the animals are feeling and thinking?
Because in order to recognize something as homosexual, you have to be able to think and feel: "Hey! this is a homosexual thing I'm doing!" Otherwise, it's not.
[/QUOTE]

orphans should get in a straight family, where they wouldn't be constantly disturbed with the strange sexuality of fathers. Just imagine coming to JHS, and saying: yea, my dad has sex with men...
Oh of course because we all go around telling people how much our hetero parents have sex and if someone doesn't want to be around you because you're different they can and stuff it and then come back... and well you know understand.

That's because they have been observing homo zookeepers.
ROFL!
I'd love to see the experiment to prove this. I don't know how easy it would be to find people willing to screw in front of animals, but then I can just imagine the little penguin looking at them puzzledly with a little thought bubble saying "Hmm, maybe I should try that. . ." You'd want to expand the experiment to see if having orgies is learned behavior, or oral sex, and oh so many exciting things.

Thank you, Doom777, for making me laugh for the past 5 minutes.

I am not uber conservative... except on the issues of homosexuality and masturbation. I link the second one to the first, you see...

oh please. take away my only pleasure.

You guys were wrong - not an uber conservative really. This guy is just a general idiot.
What a pursuasive argument. I now agree i am wrong and you're right. keep up the good work.

What a pursuasive argument. I now agree i am wrong and you're right. keep up the good work.
Yum sarcasm.

marriage is ultimately about creating a family, and a family is ultimately about having kids.

Your idea of marriage and family may be all about having kids, but you are not every human being on this planet. My boyfriend, myself, and my dog are a family. Kids aren't even involved - and although they might be one day, they certainly don't have to be for us to be a family.

for all you religious buffs out there. homosexuality is not a choice. people are born that way which makes it natural... which means, god, if there is one, endorses homosexuality because he made it a trait.

so, for all you people that say homosexuality is a trick of the devil... well you're wrong! being gay is a natural born preference. god knew that and allowed it. natural laws are universal. there is no religon that can stop them, dis-credit them, or nullify them.

peace...

Oh of course because we all go around telling people how much our hetero parents have sex and if someone doesn't want to be around you because you're different they can and stuff it and then come back... and well you know understand.
so if they have to keep it secret, it's obviously wrong. Hell, even saying "Oh yea, my dad is gay" will make you shunned for 3-4 years and make jhs the worst years of your life.

What a pursuasive argument. I now agree i am wrong and you're right. keep up the good work.

People who don't listen to reason can't be persuaded, so sometimes it's more fun to just sink to your level of "argument."

for all you religious buffs out there. homosexuality is not a choice. people are born that way which makes it natural... which means, god, if there is one, endorses homosexuality because he made it a trait.

so, for all you people that say homosexuality is a trick of the devil... well you're wrong! being gay is a natural born preference. god knew that and allowed it. natural laws are universal. there is no religon that can stop them, dis-credit them, or nullify them.

peace...

There are distict places in the Torah/Bible which condemn homosexuality. The 5th book of torah, and the story of Sodom, which felt g-d wrath after the people wanted the visitors to anal them.

so if they have to keep it secret, it's obviously wrong. Hell, even saying "Oh yea, my dad is gay" will make you shunned for 3-4 years and make jhs the worst years of your life.
JHS are the worst years of someone's life either way. Nice word twist on the hiding thing cause you know we all want to think about our parents fucking.

There are distict places in the Torah/Bible which condemn homosexuality. The 5th book of torah, and the story of Sodom, which felt g-d wrath after the people wanted the visitors to anal them.

again - there is nothing anal about anything i do - ever

again - there is nothing anal about anything i do - ever
Damn!!! :mad: :headbang:

so if they have to keep it secret, it's obviously wrong. Hell, even saying "Oh yea, my dad is gay" will make you shunned for 3-4 years and make jhs the worst years of your life.

Yeah, so since I didn't talk about my parents having sex, that must mean that them having sex was wrong!

There are distict places in the Torah/Bible which condemn homosexuality. The 5th book of torah, and the story of Sodom, which felt g-d wrath after the people wanted the visitors to anal them.

The Sodom story could be due to the fact that the townspeople wanted to *rape* the visitors, what type of rape has little to do with it.

And as for the Levitical law, well - if you want laws on how to treat your slaves, when to commit genocide, what clothing to wear, and how unclean someone is depending on the gender of their baby - have fun all you want. I am going to view those laws as exactly what they were, a code of laws written down by flawed human beings.

JHS are the worst years of someone's life either way. Nice word twist on the hiding thing cause you know we all want to think about our parents fucking.

actually i don't so much mind thinking that. if they are still fucking, that is wonderful. there is nothing wrong with fucking into middle and old age. please, be satisfied. better that then killing each other or worse yet - not even speaking.

Marriage is a form of creating a family in order to bring up kids. With a homo couple... what kids????
The ones that heteros discard?

Yeah, so since I didn't talk about my parents having sex, that must mean that them having sex was wrong!



The Sodom story could be due to the fact that the townspeople wanted to *rape* the visitors, what type of rape has little to do with it.

And as for the Levitical law, well - if you want laws on how to treat your slaves, when to commit genocide, what clothing to wear, and how unclean someone is depending on the gender of their baby - have fun all you want. I am going to view those laws as exactly what they were, a code of laws written down by flawed human beings.
No, because the main character offered the crowd his daughters, and they said no.

Also the Levitical laws say I can only own slaves from bordering countries i.e. Mexico and Canada.

Damn!!! :mad: :headbang:

:rolleyes:

The ones that heteros discard?
As i said should be picked up by other heteros

I gotta go to sleep. see you tomorrow everyone

Also the Levitical laws say I can only own slaves from bordering countries i.e. Mexico and Canada.

shit. i'm on an island.

actually i don't so much mind thinking that. if they are still fucking, that is wonderful. there is nothing wrong with fucking into middle and old age. please, be satisfied. better that then killing each other or worse yet - not even speaking.
Well I was talking about imagining the act. Which should freak anyone out.

As i said should be picked up by other heteros

I gotta go to sleep. see you tomorrow everyone

chicken - no commentary on lesbians at all. like us do you?

I think homosexuality is a minor mental disorder.
Ewww, that word "disorder" has a whole bunch of nasty connotations coming along with it.
My reasoning is due to the fact that they can't reproduce and the purpose of being alive is to keep your species alive, usually by means of reproduction.There are other ways of passing on your genes. I think maladaptive is the word used to describe this situation, but as to whether it applies to gay humans or not, :shrug:, idunno. It's probably maladaptive in some situations are adaptive in others.
Should they be discriminated against just because of their "mental disorder." Definitely not. That would be like discriminating people who suffer from depression, because after all it can be considered a mental disorder.You might want to reconsider your language. "disorder" implies that the variation is unwanted. With depression that is probably the case, but not necessarily with homosexuality.

I was so afraid but then I rationalized why would God's messengers say something wrong if God made people like that. Eh? Do I raise a good point or what?Sounds like a good point to me. On the other hand children are not created good, and a good part of growing up is learning impulse control. I'm an atheist so I'm not in a position to say one way or the other, but I recon a kind god would be all for more love in the world.

They have relationships; we recognize that. But that says nothing about the animal's capacity to recognize its relationsihp. In other words, it takes a sentient consciousness and an ability to recognize "Hey! this guy I'm in love with is another guy like me!" I don't believe animals do that. They don't recognize homosexuality. Only we do.I wouldn't rule it out absolutely; some (non-human) animals do do fairly sophisticated analysis when it comes to empathy, although not nearly to the level that humans do. It's a fascinating area of study, though not much I know about. I don't quite see what this has to do with the discussion though.

and it doesn't really look like there are many straight people left in this chat to be honest, so why are we discussing with the happily queer on our own?I'm late to the party, and geeking through the earlier posts. Although I'm more of a poseur, having a decided leaning towards the ladies.

Yes, yes I do I adore lesbians.

Yes, yes I do I adore lesbians.


what a surprise!!!!!!!! :eek:

LOL. Serious question was that sarcasm?

LOL. Serious question was that sarcasm?

problem with typing - it means my sarcastic type comes out alot like my normal type. yes, sarcasm.

Switch hitting is fun you meet wonderful people. (and some Doom777s but otherwise)

What is your nation called?

Sounds like a good point to me. On the other hand children are not created good, and a good part of growing up is learning impulse control. I'm an atheist so I'm not in a position to say one way or the other, but I recon a kind god would be all for more love in the world.

do queer people need to engage in impulse control to control that oh so painful gay impulse that we get from time to all the time?

again - look for that hint of typist sarcasm.

What is your nation called?

fighting virgins. i am new today. what about yours?

Wait you mean it's not supposed to be constant?

fighting virgins. i am new today. what about yours?
The Dictatorship of Camel Eaters 67 million bi's and counting.

Wait you mean it's not supposed to be constant?

depends........... on sex and love and contenment. cause sometimes, one forgets - and then no impulse, just is.

Sarcasm milady.

Doesn't everyone, at least once in their life, think about sexual activity with someone of the same sex? (If you don't admit it then your a liar!)

So what's wrong with it? You've thought about it! Might not be your cup of tea - but then 'straight' sex isn't everyone's first choice either!

No, because the main character offered the crowd his daughters, and they said no.

Oh, so if they had raped his daughters instead, they would have been fine upstanding members of society. Right on!

Doesn't everyone, at least onece in their life, think about sexual activity with someone of the same sex? (If you don't admit it the your a liar!)

So what's wrong with it? You've thought about it! Might not be your cup of tea - but then 'straight' sex isn't everyone's first choice either!

sorry. when doom left, he left like all the queer people behind. so yeah. that is what we all do. same sex sex (at least on occasion)

Thanks for adding the last part just for me. (At least on occasion)

Sarcasm milady.

see sarcasm on sarcasm on sarcasm leads to explanations of the obvious through sardcasm, which again leads to explanations of the obvious.

Thanks for adding the last part just for me. (At least on occasion)

i had you in mind, though i don't think you are the only swinger in the room

They should give us a freakin' Nobel Peace Prize.

If anyone else in here switch hits sound off now or it will be confirmed that bi's are a definite minority.

They should give us a freakin' Nobel Peace Prize.

we're all about the looooove thing.

If anyone else in here switch hits sound off now or it will be confirmed that bi's are a definite minority.

i'm waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaiting.........

we're all about the looooove thing.
Just not all of us analy that's all.

If anyone else in here switch hits sound off now or it will be confirmed that bi's are a definite minority.

it's oh, so quiet.

Oh God i think I just pissed off a bunch of Fighting Virgins.

hey maybe we are the only two l eft. which would make us both a majority and minority simulatenously . also equal.

If you do I will do this. :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

Just not all of us analy that's all.

what , pissed off with this????

hey maybe we are the only two l eft. which would make us both a majority and minority simulatenously . also equal.
Cool wait are you full lesbian or bi?

what , pissed off with this????
Making a reference because earlier in this thread you said you refuse to do anal.

hey maybe we are the only two l eft. which would make us both a majority and minority simulatenously . also equal.

I'm still nominally around =)

Cool wait are you full lesbian or bi?

on the lipstick lesbian train to dykeville.

I'm still nominally around =)

we should be careful what we say then........ ;)

Enjoy the pie.
Hey Dempublicents this is a lively debate please join.

Enjoy the pie.
Hey Dempublicents this is a lively debate please join.

i don't think it is so much a debate as running commentary

we should be careful what we say then........ ;)
Dempublicents is a big boy. I'm talking maturity level. I'm not so sure physically altough I'd be willing to bet...

Then commentary it shall be.
I think we are now allies.

do queer people need to engage in impulse control to control that oh so painful gay impulse that we get from time to all the time?I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that queer people shouldn't have homosexual sex. Merely that part of being human is controlling impulses. (Part of being human is also indulging impulses where appropriate). So let me clarify: while queer people do need to control their impulses, same as everyone else, there is absolutely nothing wrong with gay sex, gay relationships, gay marriage, etc...

Dempublicents is a big boy. I'm talking maturity level. I'm not so sure physically altough I'd be willing to bet...

i have no instinct currently connected to big boy- so no betting please. also, guessing it's illegal in your state......

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that queer people shouldn't have homosexual sex. Merely that part of being human is controlling impulses. (Part of being human is also indulging impulses where appropriate). So let me clarify: while queer people do need to control their impulses, same as everyone else, there is absolutely nothing wrong with gay sex, gay relationships, gay marriage, etc...
Damn right just let me watch.

I checked the past few pages...the usual bullshit.

1) Gay marriage is wrong because gays can't have kids.

You going to ban sterile hetero folk from marrying as well?

As well, gays can and often do have children through surrogates (as sterile hetero couples are known to do) and in the future may even be able to produce biological children (eggs were grown from male stem cells, and sperm from female stem cells...the implications of this are enormous).

2) The Bible-

Shut up.

Separation of Church and State

3) Homosexuality is a mental disorder.

So, whaddya gonna do, try to *cure* them? Imagine yourself being *turned* gay...not very likely, yes? Call homosexuality what you want, it doesn't change the fact that it is simply an orientation, and that is no reason to deny rights.


It's funny that people spend so much time and energy trying to ban gay marriage. Especially from so-called *Christians*...who apparently lost Christ's message of love and tolerance somewhere along the way during their obedience to the Bible.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that queer people shouldn't have homosexual sex. Merely that part of being human is controlling impulses. (Part of being human is also indulging impulses where appropriate). So let me clarify: while queer people do need to control their impulses, same as everyone else, there is absolutely nothing wrong with gay sex, gay relationships, gay marriage, etc...

i didn't actually think that you were saying it was wrong. i just thought i would point out that if i were doom 77 or any other doom i would pick you up on it.

i have no instinct currently connected to big boy- so no betting please. also, guessing it's illegal in your state......
And which state would that be? Hmm.
Oh My God did you think I was saying something other than joking? That would be wrong.

I checked the past few pages...the usual bullshit.

1) Gay marriage is wrong because gays can't have kids.

You going to ban sterile hetero folk from marrying as well?

As well, gays can and often do have children through surrogates (as sterile hetero couples are known to do) and in the future may even be able to produce biological children (eggs were grown from male stem cells, and sperm from female stem cells...the implications of this are enormous).

2) The Bible-

Shut up.

Separation of Church and State

3) Homosexuality is a mental disorder.

So, whaddya gonna do, try to *cure* them? Imagine yourself being *turned* gay...not very likely, yes? Call homosexuality what you want, it doesn't change the fact that it is simply an orientation, and that is no reason to deny rights.


It's funny that people spend so much time and energy trying to ban gay marriage. Especially from so-called *Christians*...who apparently lost Christ's message of love and tolerance somewhere along the way during their obedience to the Bible.

again - you are late. only queer people left in here. so we applaud your anger and agree with you fully.

I'm a good bi christian. That simmple my many gathered friends.

If anyone else in here switch hits sound off now or it will be confirmed that bi's are a definite minority.
That is a highly unscientific conclusion --I commend you!

And which state would that be? Hmm.
Oh My God did you think I was saying something other than joking? That would be wrong.

i don't know. chances could be that you are in nevada, but you are in one of the united ones anyway, cause, hello, canadian and mexican neighbours.
and of course you were joking. though, where i am, it is perfectly legal to bet on almost anything.

Dempublicents is a big boy.
I'm talking maturity level. I'm not so sure physically altough I'd be willing to bet...

*Checks for a penis of any size on her body* Sorry, the only penis I have any control over is my boyfriend's.

Oh betting I thought you meant pedophilia.

*Checks for a penis of any size on her body* Sorry, the only penis I have any control over is my boyfriend's.
Sorry just that until you state it a lot of folks will think y'all are guys.

That is a highly unscientific conclusion --I commend you!

sample size not big enough for you? i mean, if at the time there were only three people here, and none of the other two were bi, well, that's a pretty good sample size - quantitatively and qualitatively speeking

Sorry just that until you state it a lot of folks will think y'all are guys.

maybe we all are?

just saying......