MovieChat Forums > I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry (2007) Discussion > Primary reason why homosexuality is 'una...

Primary reason why homosexuality is 'unatural'.


The primary reason in my opinion that homosexuality is unatural is because this --> <-- (chinese guy from the movie in mind) does not equal in reproduction of new humans, which, in addition to pleasure, is the primary reason for sexual intercourse.

reply

[deleted]

Yeah you're right, it's not natural. 3 things though.

1) 99.9% of heterosexual encounters are unnatural and based solely on the pleasure principle - Kissing, Oral/Anal Sex & Vaginal Intercourse using contraception. So heterosexuals are only 00.1% Natural while homosexuals are 00.0%. So 'really' that's hardly an argument.

2) How does unnatural = bad? Where do we draw the line on when unnatural isn't good. Do you prefer your women with hairy arms/legs and no make-up whatsoever? Do you live in a mud hut hunting for food?

3) Do we honestly want to encourage people to reproduce in an overly populated world? If they want to find but it's not good to implant the idea they should or have to.

"You're suppose to be an ordinary dude (or dude-ette) not Tommy Testosterone Tits!"

reply


I'm a little sceptical of you're figures there, and kissing is all part of the mating ritual leading to intercourse. I don't think it should be in that list.

-------------------
True fans own the DVD's

reply

It is not unnatural to be gay because ... *wait for it* .... it happens NATURALLY ... omg.

Hate to break it to you, but humans are not the only species that are gay .. in fact, many animals are homosexual. There are documented instances of homosexual dogs, cats, dolphins, etc. If it weren't a natural thing, homosexuality wouldn't exist unless it were induced through unnatural means (ie - medication)

Why do you care anyway? Its not like 2 gay guys getting it on really has an effect on you anyway. Live and let live.

reply

You know, you're right! Some of those animals also regularly eat their young, kill other rivals and let the females do the hunting and then steal the food from the wife and kids. The animals don't use condoms, write songs of love or parade their sexual freedom down the boulevard. Any more useful similarities you would like to use in your 'Straw man" argument?

reply

[deleted]

jedp2, i think you just provided a ton of examples of why even heterosexual love isn't natural either. Thank you for giving us even more reasons to disregard this "homosexuality is bad because it is unnatural" argument.

ad hominem that

_
Be a loyal Bushie...
Or the Vice President will shoot you in the face

reply

About gay being unnatural:

First and foremost, nothing in nature is unnatural, that is bogus argument to begin with and just one of the “catch phrases” used by bigots and homophobes to infer that same sex love is a bad or wrong thing.

Homosexuality is a minority sexual orientation comprising typically between 2% and 15% of any given population at any given time (regardless of religious belief).

This pervasive prejudice against homosexuality was a product of a pre-Christian Jewish taboo and scholars have suggested that it was TABOO because it did not lead to procreation and children (all sexual acts which did not lead to procreation were considered taboo in Jewish laws). It is inferred that the need for children (and future warriors) was to add to the tribe’s strength against its larger hostile neighbors.

At the exact same time this prejudice existed in the Jewish tribes homosexuality was acceptable to both the Greek and Roman cultures (both cultures being considerably more sophisticated and culturally advanced than the nomadic tribes of Judea)!

Jews transformed into the early Christians and carried all of the prejudices and taboos that were in the old laws of Judaism (Old Testament).

The Roman Empire was eventually overtaken by the Christian religion (early 4th century). It can be argued that this was, at least in part, one of the reasons for the eventual fall of the Empire, since Christian (who at the time believed the Jesus was coming BACK in a matter of weeks or even days) believed they had no reason to concern themselves with earthly things like culture, the cohesion of the empire, and /or fighting off invaders from the east.

The Holy Roman Empire fell into the dark ages where the monks and the wealthy were the only one able to read, and in addition the monks were the only ones keeping copies of all manuscripts (that they elected to keep)! (We literally have no idea how much was lost because of prejudice or fears that certain manuscripts went against church doctrine)!!!

One of the first events that broke through the dark ages was the Magna Carta, which was the first document in post Christ civilization to suggest that individuals were free entities and not just the property of either the church or the landowners!

Guttenberg’s printing press finally allowed common person access to books and the saving of books fell away form the control of the church and this ushered in the renaissance (which I believe we are still a part of).

For the first time in 1500 years everything was being challenged, from science to church dogma. The examination of Catholic dogma sparked the Protestant revolution which eventually gave the world all these different flavors of Christianity each with a different set of dogma and scriptural interpretations.
The discovery of American and the prospect of a land where the CHURCH (typically this meant the Roman Catholic Church) did NOT have a stronghold on was a further push in this theocratic revolution!

America’s experiments of fostering individual freedom, promoting a democracy and establishing a republic had not been tried since the time of the ancient Greeks (most governments in Europe where either Monarchies or theocracies or a horrible combination of both, example, England under Henry the eighth)!

Our forefathers were very careful in framing the boundaries of this new republic to prevent one set of religious belief from overpowering all other and forcing this new republic into a theocracy! Men like John Adams wrote extensively about the danger he saw specifically in Christians proselytized and made sure that the constitution made it clear that religion and government were to be separated always!

>>>>>>
As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?
-- John Adams, letter to FA Van der Kamp, December 27, 1816
<<<<<<
And yes, to our forefather like John Adams the thought of homosexuals having rights would have been shocking BUT so would the concept of blacks being equal to white or women being equal to men (all of these prejudices including support for SLAVERY are a part of the Judea-Christian legacy in John Adams time).

In the beginning of the 20th century when the new science of psychology was being formed most of the men involved carried these prejudices over into their research and studies. Hence the prejudice continued. (In much the same ways as medicine and science in the 19th century supported the concept of white supremacy and found plenty of “facts” to back up that prejudicial belief – repeated again under the Nazis).

The late1930s thru the1940s saw the rise of the Nazis Government in Germany along with their brand of human eugenic and racial purity. What they did still stands as a reminder of how easily a culture can be influence to believe a complete fabrication about a minority and how much a culture can be brainwashed to follow even the most disturbing beliefs to their horrifying conclusions!

Hitler’s followers killed million of Jews, gypsies, political opponents and YES homosexuals! When the Nazis were eventually defeated, those poor souls who had withstood his drastic final solution were all set free… except for homosexuals, who because of laws on the books were put back into jail! Again, keep in mind that the only crime these men and women committed was with whom they were sexual attracted, no act or other tangible offense was committed!

The black struggle in American has raged from before the end of slavery to modern day. Those that opposed the equality of blacks over the years have been replaced by a culture that understands the nature of this prejudice and is doing much to eradicate it (though as we see from white supremacists and other racial hate group there is still much to do). At least NOW the majority of the American culture sees the true evil of racial prejudice.

Along with the racial strife American has faced up to some of its demon about gender, finally giving women equality to vote in 1920.

But Sexism and racism are still a part of our make up!

In the 1950s for the first time in this country, America citizens who were gay and lesbian began to say “We want equality and want our proper place at the table.”

Up until this point gays and lesbians were jailed, electro shocked, analyzed, institutionalized, but never just allowed to be. In the late 50s two important scientific studies began to debunk the centuries old myths about gay people, including that anywhere between 2 and 15% of the American population is predominantly gay (we won’t even get into the segment that has had homosexual experience past puberty on one or more occasions)!!!

The two scientific studies were the Kinsey Report and the Report by Evelyn Hooker which concluded that homosexuals were not maladjusted at least not any more then their heterosexual counterparts.

Gay began to organized and get active to change laws in the late 60s! Soon people of good conscience and intelligent began to see how unfairly this segment of American had been treated. Equality started to expand to include gays and lesbians.

The religious nuts, who had always tried to wrestled control of this country, were outraged. They had lost their battle to keep slavery, had lost their “right” to keep blacks and women in their places, so they were not willing to let go of the prejudice against gays! Keep in mind that religious people have used scriptural quotes from the bible to prove all their prejudicial belief concerning blacks, women, gays, foreigners, slavery etc.


In the 1970s upstanding religious bigots like Jerry Falwell began building organization like “the moral majority” to fight any advancement gays might make. Falwell, though he wanted to keep this pretty quiet, had been a mover and shaker in the religious movement for separation of the races. He often used scripture to prove how important it was (and I heard him say these words myself when I was just a kid) to keep the white bird apart from the black bird! (???) Since he had lost that war, he devoted himself to fighting the GAY demons!

Gay men and women made great progress over the 70 and early 80s but the onset of HIV was a major blow to the gay men’s community.

Well let it not be said that the religious predators would miss an opportunity to go for the throat of its sworn enemy!

In churches all over this country RELIGIOUS leader were praising HIV and its devastation of the gay community, calling it the wrath of God. Ultimately, this backfired on them big time (think Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist Church). Many fair minded Americans were outraged that people who were professing to be god’s representatives here on earth were being so callused and heartless.

But like the Phoenix rising out of the ashes, the gay community rallied itself. Each year of the tragedy saw more people die but it also saw more people come out and stand up! Everyone began to know someone who was gay, and the prejudiced began to look just like what it really is, lies perpetrated on a minority.

In the 90s several amazing things occurred, the Supreme Court finally saw that to hold gay criminally accountable for sexual activities that ALL Americans engaged in was both unfair and un-American. The sodomy laws (again based on RELIGION, not on humanity) were tossed out, and for the first time in American history gay men and women were no longer criminals in the eyes of their country.

Even more amazing, several states were actually considering giving committed gay couple the same equality as heterosexual couple and allow them to legally marry.

But the BIGOTS would not have it!

They started the spin machines running. Allowing gays to marry would somehow, mysteriously, destroy heterosexual marriage (which was at an all time health point with a 50% divorce rate)! Again, as in Nazi Germany, a minority was being used as a scapegoat. Hitler said that Jews were spreading venereal disease across Europe. Religious bigots here made the same claims about gay with HIV. Neither of these beliefs were or are true! But it allowed these fanatics to get a stronghold.

All over this nation, religious bigots persuaded their brainwashed followers to installed JIM CROW type laws against gays and lesbians, denying them marriage equality. In some cases denying them any chance to get the protections that are so easily obtains with a simple marriage certificate.


Some other myth about gays:

Gays can’t reproduce!
Of course they can, they will just do it with planning and a turkey baster!

Gays are immoral!
After hearing the representatives of GOD on earth lie thru their teeth, I’ll trust a gay person before I would trust the likes of Pat Robertson or his ilk.

Gays are pedophiles (or as bad as pedophiles)!
All the evidence point to about 90% of all pedophile not only being male and heterosexually inclined BUT in most cases is a family member or close friend of the family (ouch, sucks to be a straight father, brother, uncle, cousin or close family friend)!

Gays sex is sex between two adults who can make an informed consent!

Allowing gays to marry will open the door to polygamy and incest marriages.
NO, no one is suggesting either of these things but again, they are “catch phrases and words” which excite a base of followers (like dogs going after a doggie treat).

Incest can lead to birth deformities.

Polygamy is actually legal in many countries so I really don’t see any reason not to allow it. If an Arabic man who has 4 legal wives moves to American must he drop three of his wives? My only complaint is that it’s a sexist accommodation and only men seem able to have multiple marriage partners!

Please keep in mind that none of the accusations used against gay and lesbian people are new. They are all recycled hate speech often used to justify Racism and Anti-Semitism and other forms of xenophobia!



GOD, PLEASE SAVE ME FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS!!!


reply

[deleted]

"does not equal in reproduction of new humans"


Since the planet is already infested and over-populated with humans, this is not really a valid argument.

Silence is golden but duct tape is silver.

reply

soooo much to read, so i didn't...good nite

reply

Give me a definition of what "natural" is


from dictionary.com:

nat·u·ral /&#712;næt&#643;&#601;r&#601;l, &#712;næt&#643;r&#601;l/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[nach-er-uhl, nach-ruhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1. existing in or formed by nature (opposed to artificial): a natural bridge.
2. based on the state of things in nature; constituted by nature: Growth is a natural process.
3. of or pertaining to nature or the universe: natural beauty.
4. of, pertaining to, or occupied with the study of natural science: conducting natural experiments.
5. in a state of nature; uncultivated, as land.
6. growing spontaneously, without being planted or tended by human hand, as vegetation.
7. having undergone little or no processing and containing no chemical additives: natural food; natural ingredients. Compare organic (def. 11).
8. having a real or physical existence, as opposed to one that is spiritual, intellectual, fictitious, etc.
9. of, pertaining to, or proper to the nature or essential constitution: natural ability.
10. proper to the circumstances of the case: a natural result of his greed.
11. free from affectation or constraint: a natural manner.
12. arising easily or spontaneously: a natural courtesy to strangers.
13. consonant with the nature or character of.
14. in accordance with the nature of things: It was natural that he should hit back.
15. based upon the innate moral feeling of humankind: natural justice.
16. in conformity with the ordinary course of nature; not unusual or exceptional.
17. happening in the ordinary or usual course of things, without the intervention of accident, violence, etc.
18. related only by birth; of no legal relationship; illegitimate: a natural son.
19. related by blood rather than by adoption.
20. based on what is learned from nature rather than on revelation.
21. true to or closely imitating nature: a natural representation.
22. unenlightened or unregenerate: the natural man.
23. being such by nature; born such: a natural fool.
24. Music. a. neither sharp nor flat.
b. changed in pitch by the sign &#9838;.

25. not treated, tanned, refined, etc.; in its original or raw state: natural wood; natural cowhide.
26. (of a horn or trumpet) having neither side holes nor valves.
27. not tinted or colored; undyed.
28. having a pale tannish or grayish-yellow color, as many woods and untreated animal skins.
29. Cards. a. being a card other than a wild card or joker.
b. (of a set or sequence of cards) containing no wild cards.

30. having or showing feelings, as affection, gratitude, or kindness, considered part of basic human nature.
31. Afro (def. 1).
–noun 32. any person or thing that is or is likely or certain to be very suitable to and successful in an endeavor without much training or difficulty.
33. Music. a. a white key on a piano, organ, or the like.
b. the sign &#9838;, placed before a note, canceling the effect of a previous sharp or flat.
c. a note affected by a &#9838;, or a tone thus represented.

34. an idiot.
35. Cards. blackjack (def. 2b).
36. Afro (def. 2).
37. (in craps) a winning combination of seven or eleven made on the first cast.
38. a natural substance or a product made with such a substance: an ointment containing mink oil and other naturals.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1300–50; ME < L n&#257;t&#363;r&#257;lis (see nature, -al1); r. ME naturel < MF < L, as above]

—Related forms
nat·u·ral·ness, noun


—Synonyms 11. spontaneous, unaffected, genuine, unmannered.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.


.........sorry, i just couldn't resist.


Silence is golden but duct tape is silver.

Member of the POSTING QUOTA MUST DIE club

reply

that should be a wikipedia article. ha!

nice answer!

good work.

reply

>> that should be a wikipedia article. ha!

nice answer!

good work. <<

Here is an even better read:

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

GOD, PLEASE SAVE ME FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS!!!

reply

The desperate argument that 'homosexual relationships don't lead to reproduction so therefore they are unnatural' really doesn't hold any water, and I am amazed that idiots are still trying to run that routine.

By that logic, heterosexual sex with birth control is also 'unnatural' and infertile heterosexual couples are also 'unnatural'.
Basically any sexual activity that doesn't result in reproduction or with the intent of reproducing is 'unnatural'. And according to you, anything that is 'unnatural' is bad and shouldn't be tolerated.

Gay people are not taking over the world. There are still more than enough heterosexuals around to keep the human species going.
Anyone who has a problem with homosexuality is just a fascist bigot that can't live with the knowledge that some people don't live their lives within the heterosexual norm.

reply

it is natural because it is seen all through the animal kingdom. It's not a choice brought about by having seen gay people on tv. Animals are born gay or straight.

Main evolutionary reason: It helps to control the population. After all the last thing we need is more people.

reply

Everytime there is a movie depicting anything referring to the gay lifestyle you always have a person who has to tout the wrongness of it and another who trots out all the friggin idiots like Pat Robertson. Everyone should have their opinion though, so I will have mine

A little reply to your myths and facts about gays alpeaston

Sure animals have same sex encounters - but they don't lead their entire life that way. When they want to reproduce they go back to a different sex partner. This tells me that they are engaging in same sex encounters for pleasure only or 'just because it feels good' I don't think they differentiate between liking male or female, they just take what comes along to get off so to speak. Really don't see how this applies to humans..

Gays cannot reproduce naturally, which makes it UNNATURAL. Using a turkey baster, a blowgun, a funnel or other such unnatural means does not count. And before you trot out the heterosexual folks who can't reproduce either, low sperm counts or fertility unavailability is NOT the same thing. However, in vitro fertilization is also not natural nor are fertility drugs. When you can take a gay couple, drop them on a desert island and you come back in a year or so to see they have produced children, then I will say its as natural as bees pollinating flowers.

Gays are immoral - sorry but when morals are defined by religion (and most are) then they are immoral because it goes against the morals of the land. It's only been in the last 50 years or so that people in this country (ppl in general always have) have made great efforts to remove God from their lives so they can live unrestrained from answering to a Higher Power (I don't think that will make any difference in the end - but good luck with that) Being open minded myself I think gays and lesbians are capable of loving and wonderful relationships, but I don't get to decide what is right and wrong, or what is wholesome or immoral as an individual - and neither do you. But really, you should try listening to God Himself instead of some schmuck on TV for once. PR or JF are definitely not indicative of Christians anymore than Jeffrey Dahmer or Aileen Wournos (known to be gay/lesbian) are of the gay community/lifestyle.

I don't think allowing gays to marry in the eyes of religion should be allowed. I also don't think that eating a big pork sandwich at a Muslim gathering should be allowed either. Why? - because both are a mockery of the respective religions. (I am not Muslim so if I have it wrong about Muslims and eating pork being a no no I apologize - but you get my point) If you subscribe to a faith then you do so from the whole cloth, not just the parts you want to. Either make up your own or don't subscribe at all. Now having said that - civil unions for gays/lesbians? why not? Something ought to be done to cement relationships and secure rights as a partner in life for people who are gay. Just don't force it in a church whose religion forbids it or try to force people of a faith to accept it as normal.

Opening doors to polygamy and incestuous marriages? I get your point and agree to some extent. But for many years humanity has become more and more lax about what is agreeable to do and not do and that does open doors for worse things. How much longer do you think it will be before no one is accountable for their actions? How much longer before we see advocates for ppl wanting to have sex with animals? Advocates for ppl wanting to have sex with children? Advocates for ppl to commit any atrocities for the sake of pleasure or self? Will it eventually be ok? You may be sitting here scoffing and saying oh that'll never happen, but 50 or so years ago ppl said the same thing about the gay lifestyle and yet here we are. We sit and ooh and ahh over these teachers who are having relationships with students and cry foul yet Mary Kay Letourneau and the student she was convicted of child rape over (she was 34 and he was 12) are now married and have 2 children. They were supposedly even paid 800K by ET for exclusive rights to their wedding. She said she never once doubted her feelings for the young man, so does that make it ok? She spent 7 yrs in prison over it, so maybe not. If it had been a man and a 12 yr old girl, he wouldn't be allowed to see his kids right now, let alone marry the victim and live as a family. But where do we draw the line and can that line be drawn? My point is humans have a unique way of rationalizing what we like as individuals, and then trying to force everyone else to accept it as 'natural' Shoot everyone thinks I am weird cause I like mayo sandwiches (don't everyone?)- course I don't try to force them to like it or accept that I do, either.

You can harp all you want about proselytizing of Christians, And you can trot out John Adams and idiots like Fred Phelps and Jerry Falwell and the separation of church and state. But when it all comes down to where the bear boogied in the buckwheat, you are no different than those you rail against - just a different belief and a different forum to try and convince everyone you're the one who is right.


GOD SAVE ME FROM THOSE WHO WOULD SAVE ME FROM YOU!!

reply

Let me preface this by saying, I'm a complete idiot for even walking into this minefield of poorly realized opinions... But let's me tell you why I think samson9724 is a bigger idiot.


1. Penguins mate for life. And it has been well documented that there are gay penguins that raise surrgote eggs.

2. Condoms are unnatural. Are you telling me that you practice unsafe sex? Diseases are natural, perhaps you should get one.

3. Morality is never based on religion. Morality is personal. You may have grown up in a religious environment, and that may shape your world view -- but it is YOUR world view. And it's just as real if no one, or everyone, agrees wih it. Majority of opinion does not morality make. (oh, and if you didn't catch it, what I'm saying is that morality is not natural--it's learned)

4. Marriage is a religious institution. Therefore, in the eyes of the law, no couple can be married, hetero or homo. You may have a ceremony in your church and that may define you as married... but try not signing the license and tell me how married you are.

5. And poligamy/incest/bestiality? Those exist whether we want to legalize their relationships or not. Who am I to tell them how they may find love? Polygamy, well, if their church wants to marry ten wives to one man, it doesn't mean that any but the first is legal. Look at the TV show "Big Love." They seem to have the hang of it(ish).

Incest? Who does that (other than everyone in the Middle Ages)?! Geez.

Bestiality? Well as long as I'm blissfully unaware of your actions that you commit in the safety and privacy of your bedroom -- please wear a condom.

Someone brought up pedophilia at some point -- and in this matter I am in agreement with samson. Comparing homosexual rights to pedophila is not only wrong (in the matter of it not being equal), but it's also terribly unfair to the thousands, if not millions, of children that are, have been, and regrettably will be abused by someone they trust.

If you don't care about what's being said here, I applaud you. If you feel the need to contest me, I welcome you (even though I'll probably never stumble on here again, and, like me, will be getting ticked off by some who's probably forgotten they even posted this).

However, if you ever feel the need to say that homosexuality is NOT NATURAL, let me remind you of this: Your computer is also not borne of this Earth... And the last time I saw plastic coming out of the earth was at a local landfill. Please recycle your computer after your brain is done short-circuiting. You've done enough to ruin this Earth already, or at least my night.

P.S: Don't give me that "God made the man that made this computer..." -- because we all know that the man that made your computer is going to hell for being so greedy and making such huge profits on his God-given invention.

reply

[deleted]

Sure animals have same sex encounters - but they don't lead their entire life that way.

Are you 100% of this? Where's your proof?

Gays are immoral - sorry but when morals are defined by religion (and most are) then they are immoral because it goes against the morals of the land.

So, gays are immoral because religion says it is because it's "defined" that way? Nope, sorry. Religion doesn't set morality. Each individual religion sets its own morality, and those who follow said religion have to obey those guidelines or what they do (or don't do) could be perceived as immoral but one religion, or even all religions do not speak for the whole of the population.

I don't think allowing gays to marry in the eyes of religion should be allowed. I also don't think that eating a big pork sandwich at a Muslim gathering should be allowed either. Why? - because both are a mockery of the respective religions.

One religion shouldn't speak for all religions. So, to say that - in your opinion - that gays shouldn't marry "in the eyes of religion" is just an opinion you hold and doesn't apply to homosexuals at all, it just applies to your own belief, and opinion of the matter.

Also, Christians shouldn't be eating anything that comes from pigs, it says it in the Old Testament, and it seems that only Jews, and Muslims follow this law, and not Christians. Christians have a tendency to disregard some "laws" of the Bible, and recognize others when it suits their particular need.

So, Christians mock themselves when they eat pork.

But when it all comes down to where the bear boogied in the buckwheat, you are no different than those you rail against - just a different belief and a different forum to try and convince everyone you're the one who is right.

And you're different from him/her, how?

-Nam


I'm on the road less traveled...

reply

i get the point

reply

WOW! that was amazing!!!! Congratulations!!!! Finally an educated person!!!!

reply

Thank you for the history lesson, however, there are flaws too numerous to go into detail here-book writing on a movie web site seems windy. With that said, fundamentally, you have done your research...but what it all boils down to is faith, or that which one cannot be proven without faith itself... something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs. That is Webster, by the way.

Is it possible to live a full and satisfying life without faith in God, or even in one's self? I highly doubt it, however, that is dependant soley on the individual. I agree with most of your opinions, or historical fact. Faith in God doesn't completely blow your opinion, or your historical recollection as may be the case, out of the water. However, it does leave one who maintains a true Christian faith comfortable in the knowing that God does forgive and that who ever writes (or has written) history had better consider the consequences of misleading the children. We, being the children.

All that I am trying to say here is that faith in God or Jesus is reason enough
for me to take the Bible for what it is worth, and that I can accept differences in myself and others with an understanding that those differences, if I allow them, will defeat the purpose of my purpose filled life. NO ONE is perfect. We all fall short of the glory of God.

rabidgoldfish65

reply

You make me so happy. I don't know why I frustrate myself with reading homophobic, uneducated comments from people who think that they have a monopoly on ultimate truth. I love how diligently you've mapped your response to the simplified, ignorant original posting.

Thanks for reminding me that there actually are intelligent people still left in the world.



STWIKE HIM CENTUWIAN, VERY WUFFLY!

reply

"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."John 13 34-35

live and let live everybody.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

"The animals don't use condoms, write songs of love or parade their sexual freedom down the boulevard."

I think you're right that animals don't use condoms. However several animal species do write and sing love songs, mating calls and perform dances to attract mates. Some animals go farther than we do: Up here in Colorado people come from all over to watch the elk males nearly kill each other in order to get a sexual partner.

Several animal species also have physical traits that help them attract mates: various scents and bright color patterns which they will openly brandish for courtship purposes. As far as parading their sexual freedom there are two statements that could be made: (a)Animals already have sexual freedom and (b)Humans are the only species that need to publicly lobby for their freedoms.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I'd like you to use a useful similarity to the correct definition of "Straw Man".

I guess your point is that humans are a totally unique portion of the animal world on Earth, and they have no similarities in behavior to other animals.

So right off the bat you're wrong. Human behave pretty much like all other animals and even worse in many ways. Better in many ways as well.

So the original reply was spot on, and you STILL don't know what a "Straw Man" argument is.

reply

Kissing is actually not part of the mating ritual as many people think. The actual concept of kissing in terms of sexual attraction has been around for only a couple thousand years and was a cultural thing. Human history is much longer and shows no actual signs that point to instinct. It's a learned human trait.

reply

If that's the case, rape is completely natural and should be rewarded if it leads to pregnancy.

Thank you for your kindness, tolerance, and understanding.

-----
"A lie is the truth, until you recognize it as a lie."

reply

That is as old and deeply riduculous arguemnt. Gays and lesbian do not lose the ability to procreate. Many Gay and Lesbian couples have children, and with the help of turkey basters they can produce as many children as they WANT. Perhaps the difference you are talking about is that Sally the slut would not be getting knocked up by Billy Bob the drunk, hence gays don't have any unplanned pregnancies or any need of abortion (which is almost 100% a heterosexual activity)!


GOD, PLEASE SAVE ME FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS!!!

reply

That is true in the years before Ipods and cable television, humans didn't implant their sperm into the female reproductive system. Reproduction occured in a natural way, which is a male and a female having sexual relations and having (sometimes but not always) a baby 9-10 months later.

reply

The only unnatural acts are those things that CANNOT be done. Anything allowed by the laws of nature is natural. Denying this is basically calling God (who, if you believe in certain faiths, created these laws) a liar.

reply

I believe that there are a lot of "unnatural" things that happen to people. By the TC standards he could be saying that people who are born with mental handicaps are "unnatural", or maybe we should tell siamese twins to start acting natural because god would never want them to be the way they are. Perhaps people with two different color eyes are "unnatural", or maybe its left handed people.
My point is that there is no perfect way a person should be and just because you are not gay or don't understand homosexuality don't judge someone who is. Sexuality is a just another part of humans that is unique to each individual, and it is and probably will remain a much smaller percentage of the population but don't try and and say that its "unnatural" when nature itself creates so many strange, unique, unexplainable, and wonderful things. At least that is my opinion.

reply


I believe that there are a lot of "unnatural" things that happen to people. By the TC standards he could be saying that people who are born with mental handicaps are "unnatural", or maybe we should tell siamese twins to start acting natural because god would never want them to be the way they are. Perhaps people with two different color eyes are "unnatural", or maybe its left handed people.
My point is that there is no perfect way a person should be and just because you are not gay or don't understand homosexuality don't judge someone who is. Sexuality is a just another part of humans that is unique to each individual, and it is and probably will remain a much smaller percentage of the population but don't try and and say that its "unnatural" when nature itself creates so many strange, unique, unexplainable, and wonderful things. At least that is my opinion.


That is a different semantic definition of "natural" than mine, but is valid and if I assume your particular definition to be correct, then what follows in your argument is logical and I agree with all of it.

reply

Who's to judge what's natural? Give me a definition of what "natural" is, and then maybe you can make a good argument.

reply

Who's to judge what's natural? Give me a definition of what "natural" is, and then maybe you can make a good argument.


It's a matter of semantics. The above poster gave a particular semantic definition, and using that as a basis, proceeded to actually make a logical argument. I disagree with him in terms of his interpretation of "natural" but I have to admit that, given a certain assumption (the validity of which can be argued separately), what follows is consistent with that assumption and therefore constitutes a respectable argument, as much as it is contrary to my personal beliefs.

reply

True. Still many animals are homosexual some part of the year.

And the internet isn't natural either. But are you complaining?

"Who died and made you president Nixon?"
- Peter Griffin

reply

Some people think beastiality is natural. Some people are pedophiles. Where do you draw the line?

reply

So long as it's not hurting anyone I can't see a reason to even draw a line in the first place.
Pedophilia is of course harmful and I don't expect animals to like people having sex with them. You know they feel phisical pain just as much as we do.

"Who died and made you president Nixon?"
- Peter Griffin

reply

I agree. If it's not hurting anyone, no reason to worry about it. However, you could contend that a gay couple are hurting their children by having them grow up with two mothers or two fathers. The teasing by other kids can be incredibly cruel and most believe that a child needs a father and a mother. Even in a broken home, the father and mother should be there for the kids. Doesn't always happen and that's sad. Most kids that end up in trouble with the law come from homes that are missing a parent or both parents.

reply

You make statements that just are not supported but any legitimate organizations:

>>
gay couple are hurting their children by having them grow up with two mothers or two fathers

most believe that a child needs a father and a mother

Even in a broken home, the father and mother should be there for the kids
<<

Plenty of dysfunctional and terrible human being have grown up in traditional families. And Plenty of functional and terrific human being had grown un in unconventional families.

"there is a considerable body of professional literature that suggests children with parents who are homosexual have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment and development as children whose parents are heterosexual." American Academy of Pediatricians


"Children growing up in same-sex parental households do not necessarily have differences in self-esteem, gender identity, or emotional problems from children growing up in heterosexual parent homes” says Ellen C. Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. She revealed the findings at the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference and Exhibition. "


Please stop spewing nonsense out of the same orifice that your crap comes out of!



GOD, PLEASE SAVE ME FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS!!!




reply

[deleted]

So, it's not the homosexual population's problem. It's the Christian Right's problem.


One thing that I really, really hate is when people mistake phobic ignorance, hatred, & violence for a homosexual problem. Children raised in a homosexual family might be subject to homophobic attacks, but that is NOT the fault of the homosexual couple. People who provide love & support for their children are not to blame for the ignorant violence of strangers.

"Being gay is bad because homophobes attack you," is like saying "Being American is bad because terrorists attack you."

Put the blame where it deserves to be.

_
Be a loyal Bushie...
Or the Vice President will shoot you in the face

reply

Plenty of dysfunctional and terrible human being have grown up in traditional families. And Plenty of functional and terrific human being had grown un in unconventional families.


um.....im NOT DENYING that but...do you have proof?

Silence is golden but duct tape is silver.

Member of the POSTING QUOTA MUST DIE club

reply

I think that it is obvious that plenty of heterosexual couples produce miserable kids and I have to assume that gay couple can produce miserable kids.

However, the point I was making was that the poster comments about children growing up in gay household were absolutely WRONG and I gave example to prove that!

Here are the examples I gave:

"there is a considerable body of professional literature that suggests children with parents who are homosexual have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment and development as children whose parents are heterosexual." American Academy of Pediatricians


"Children growing up in same-sex parental households do not necessarily have differences in self-esteem, gender identity, or emotional problems from children growing up in heterosexual parent homes” says Ellen C. Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. She revealed the findings at the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference and Exhibition. "

GOD, PLEASE SAVE ME FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS!!!

reply

[deleted]

Some people think beastiality is natural. Some people are pedophiles. Where do you draw the line?


While the "slippery slope" (aka "where draw the line?) concern is often a valid one and almost always worth considering, there seems to be a pretty clear "line" here (more than one, actually). The most important one is that homosexual sex is between two consenting adults, whereas adult consent is not present in your other examples. I guess that would no longer be the case if we were to find a way for animals to be able to communicate their consent somehow, but... ugh, that's enough about that. You should get the idea without my having to think of scenarios where horrible things might become "okay" or "legal."

reply

Um, hate to break it to you but there are homosexuals who reproduce "new humans." Gay men have sperm that can get women pregnant, lesbians can get pregnant, and yes, straights can have babies - and even give birth to babies that are gay! ! So your primary reason why homosexuality is 'unnatural' bites the big one (with pleasure of course).

reply

So you are saying it is natural to have a man squirt into a bottle and then have it put in a lesbian so the lesbian and her wife can have a kid that belongs to a man who she doesn't have any relationship with other than using his sperm?


uh......ok, i guess......

reply

Is this still the completely ridiculous argument bout gays not reproducing.

People, what planet are you on? The fact that gay do not reporduce is a GOOD thing, otherwise in about 50 years we will be so overpopulated that homosexuality will be MANDATED by religions!

What complete butt wholes some people are!

SHEESH!!

reply

What does being over-populated have to do with what is natural and what is not?

reply

>> What does being over-populated have to do with what is natural and what is not? <<

It has been suggested that homosexuality is much more prevelent during times of overpopulation (by both scientist and biologist). Hence a natural response to overpopulation.

reply

[deleted]

So, are you saying it's not natural for a straight man to squirt into a bottle to give a straight woman (and her unfertile husband) a kid that otherwise belongs to a another man who doesn't have any relationship with the woman except the use of his sperm? uh.....ok, i guess....What's natural for some, isn't natural for others.

reply

The way I see it is that if two people love each other, despite their gender, they should be allowed to love each other and be free to experience all the pleasures of life that all couples do.



"While I don't agree with what you say, for the love of God SAY IT!!!" -Hunter Thompson

reply

Your post bugs me a lot.

Maybe it's your use of the word "natural." Instead, you should have said, 'things that prosper and always work out the way I expect.' My definition of natural sounds more like this - "Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind" (Mac Dictionary). In other words, not supernatural. And no matter how a Christian could look at it, there's nothing supernatural about gay sex.

Or maybe it's your assumption that there are two primary reason (an enigma in and of itself) that humans have sex only for pleasure and reproduction. Your use of the word pleasure sweeps over a huge range of feelings and emotions. I mean, sex is very biologically rewarding - adrenaline rush, dopamine rush, euphoria, etc. But most find a purpose of sex to be spiritual rather than biological - a union of two souls and all that. It appeals on an intellectual level only humans seem to be capable of as well, which is based in self-awareness and social interaction.

Either way, these are huge factors you're ignoring. It insults me as a human being when you trivialize sexuality and emotion.

reply

And no matter how a Christian could look at it, there's nothing supernatural about gay sex.
DAMN! {insert-gay-sex-joke-here}

_
Be a loyal Bushie...
Or the Vice President will shoot you in the face

reply

Well what's Natural?

Thing's that are Natural for someone are unnatural for others.

Which Totally Blows your theory/reason out of the water.

reply


Exactly, liampaine, exactly!!!!

Instead of focusing on what is apparently "unnatural" about homosexuality, you need to look beyond the sex and you'll probs see what is the most natural thing in the world:

To Love.


Man: "I can't feel anything anymore!!"
[SLAP]
Woman: "Do you feel that?!!"

reply