NationStates Jolt Archive

If God was oppsed to gay couples having sex, why did he give us a G-spot? So that we could enjoy ourselves while we shit?

If God was oppsed to gay couples having sex, why did he give us a G-spot? So that we could enjoy ourselves while we shit?


That is soooo odd. Tell me, have you had excrements pleasure you in that way before? Cause it might be a medical problem.

That is soooo odd. Tell me, have you had excrements pleasure you in that way before? Cause it might be a medical problem.
That's my point, why the heck do we have it then?

Homosexuals like identical twins are not the work of God, but merely genetic mutations.

Homosexuals like identical twins are not the work of God, but merely genetic mutations.
you know that there is no gens for homosexuality, right?

Homosexuals like identical twins are not the work of God, but merely genetic mutations.
That's only a theory. There's no proof to that, however, all research done thus far has stated that it is not simply genes that control homosexuality. So please don't try to pass off speculation as fact- it doesn't work.

As for the male G-spot, I might be able to explain this. When the human is a zygote, there is no distiction of male of female with the exception of that 1 chromosome from the sperm. This one chromosome controls what develops and defines ones sexuality. A Y-chromosome would develop the penis, and it is theorized that a woman's clitoris is an undeveloped penis, which is why both parts are sensitive on the body. However, there is a limit that the one gene could do, and it could be surmised that the G-spot is in fact not controlled by this. A heterosexual guy doing what would be "normal" would not in fact find it, but rather than have that be one more change, it was just left there.

I don't see why God would have a problem with it. It's not chosen. Granted, there's debate about this, but I don't think it makes sense for a person to chose an orientation that will only cause him/her to undergo a lot of pain and rejection.

Well, it's true that an object inserted into the rectum far enough can cause a man to ejaculate on the spot. That's because it stimulates the prostate gland, which is a major producer in a part of the seminal fluid. That doesn't mean it's meant to be stimulate this way. It's just there, next to the intestine. I suppose I could be wrong, but if the prostate was actually in someone's rectum rather than next to it I might be convinced that it's mean to happen, as you say. LOL.

you know that there is no gens for homosexuality, right?
We do not know that. We most certainly have not mapped the entire human genome, and we have a lot more work to do. I personally suspect that there is some genetic component, simply because I see no other way for that to occur. A person is their genes, and if it is not genetic, then I don't know what the hell it is.

Did God create midgets,Dwarves whatever?.

Sorry..What about Gay midgets?..I mean did he make them as well?

No He didn't, they were created when He sat on some other people.

We do not know that. We most certainly have not mapped the entire human genome, and we have a lot more work to do. I personally suspect that there is some genetic component, simply because I see no other way for that to occur. A person is their genes, and if it is not genetic, then I don't know what the hell it is.

I suspect if anything, homosexuality is caused by environmental factors. If it was genetic, then homosexual parents would have homiosexual kids, which has never been observed. Also, God (if he exists) DID creat homosexuality. The bonobo ape, the geneticaly closest animal to humans, is known for having a socity based upon sexual contact between animals of the same gender.

I suspect if anything, homosexuality is caused by environmental factors. If it was genetic, then homosexual parents would have homiosexual kids, which has never been observed.
I know, that's the part that throws me off. However, I don't think there have been many scientific studies on heredity of homosexuality. If for no other reason than homosexuals do not reproduce as much as their heterosexual counterparts. Environmental factors make no sense, however. There has never been a correlation between the environment and homosexuality, as far as I can tell. There have been same-sex copulative behaviours demonstrated in certain cultures, but the people who did that were not homosexual, per se. I would be willing to wager quite a bit of money that it is not environmental factors that influnce a person's sexual orientation. It might be something else that we're just missing... The reason I am leaning towards belief that it is genetic is because that is what determines what the body does. It is what creates the proteins that are the building blocks of all life. Does anyone know if they've found out what determines sexual orientation? What an individual is attracted to?

I suspect if anything, homosexuality is caused by environmental factors. If it was genetic, then homosexual parents would have homiosexual kids, which has never been observed. Also, God (if he exists) DID creat homosexuality. The bonobo ape, the geneticaly closest animal to humans, is known for having a socity based upon sexual contact between animals of the same gender.

Bonobos are known more for their sexual promiscuity then homosexuality, they'll do just about anything that 'presents'. It makes me wonder what early man was like. :fluffle:

The g-spot is made of the same material as a prostate. In a human zygote, when the sex of the child is determined, the gonads either go up into the body to be overies or descend to become testicles. In much the same way, a gland either becomes a prostate or the g-spot.

I still don't see what this has to do with gays.

What the hell are we talking about again?

Homosexuals like identical twins are not the work of God, but merely genetic mutations.

Thats another issue...why are we letting mutants such as identical twins breed?...it can only spell the death of our species. I say we round up all the mutants and execute them at once.

Homosexuals like identical twins are not the work of God, but merely genetic mutations.
I didn't notice this before. Identical twins are not "genetic mutations" at all. It is when the zygote splits too compeltely early on in development. It is not genetic at all. Oops.

We do not know that. We most certainly have not mapped the entire human genome, and we have a lot more work to do. I personally suspect that there is some genetic component, simply because I see no other way for that to occur. A person is their genes, and if it is not genetic, then I don't know what the hell it is.

That I won't agree with, a person is more than merely their genes. But a product of genes and experiences (memories/upbringing/etc.)

Even if you were to make a genetic "clone" of yourself, it would not become you.

That I won't agree with, a person is more than merely their genes. But a product of genes and experiences (memories/upbringing/etc.)

Even if you were to make a genetic "clone" of yourself, it would not become you.
Yes, but there is no evidence that it affects things such as sexual orientation. Experiences will never change the intellectual capacity of a person. How, how much it is utilised, and sundry other factors may change how it appears, but there may not be much of a change. Now we're getting into the whole "nature vs. nurture" argument. I am very sure that homosexuality is not an acquired trait. Otherwise a child raised by homosexual parents would almost certainly become homosexual, since most homosexuals are borne from hetero- or bisexual parents. There is no evidence to support that homosexuality may be developed, in fact there is evidence to the contrary. Granted, sodomy seems to be able to be developed in atmospheres such as a prison where contact with the other sex is extremely limited. Again, I do not consider such activities to be homosexuality, but a mere sexual release, either as a substitute for desperate persons, or perhaps a cultural expectation. Feudal Japan, as well as classical Greece and Rome come to mind. I do not believe there was a larger percentage of homsexuals in these places, even though there was greatly increased same-sex copulation, primarily among males. It was a strictly copulative aspect in my opinion, not extending beyond that realm.

Yes, but there is no evidence that it affects things such as sexual orientation. Experiences will never change the intellectual capacity of a person. How, how much it is utilised, and sundry other factors may change how it appears, but there may not be much of a change. Now we're getting into the whole "nature vs. nurture" argument. I am very sure that homosexuality is not an acquired trait. Otherwise a child raised by homosexual parents would almost certainly become homosexual, since most homosexuals are borne from hetero- or bisexual parents. There is no evidence to support that homosexuality may be developed, in fact there is evidence to the contrary. Granted, sodomy seems to be able to be developed in atmospheres such as a prison where contact with the other sex is extremely limited. Again, I do not consider such activities to be homosexuality, but a mere sexual release, either as a substitute for desperate persons, or perhaps a cultural expectation. Feudal Japan, as well as classical Greece and Rome come to mind. I do not believe there was a larger percentage of homsexuals in these places, even though there was greatly increased same-sex copulation, primarily among males. It was a strictly copulative aspect in my opinion, not extending beyond that realm.

Ah, small minds.

Can I ask you some questions? Why is everything black and white to you? What does it have to be one or the other? Why cannot contributing factors be both?