|
My evolution theory involving fa...*ahem* i mean homosexuality (pg. 26)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| FallingMoon |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RJT
Oh, and for the record, just so everyone doesn't get this impression like "OMG RJT What an insecure prick!" there was nothing in this post that I didn't know before it was posted... :) |
SOO you knew that I am going to kidnap myra during WMC & make lots of rolling babies with her?
I WIN! :toothless |
|
|
| EriK_V |
| close this thread already |
|
|
| emc^2 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
oh and based on the part of your post i've bolded, i think it's safe to assume that you'd be ok with your father ing your 9 year old daughter or son (if u had one)? |
Well, it would be wrong in many different ways, especially considering my father's been deceased for the past 5 years and my son is not yet 9. :rolleyes:
However, I did not condone incest or even hom0seksuality other than to say that what others do - involving conscenting adults - is not my place to judge.
Don't mix terms here, sweety - this is not a 3 card monte. I would have a big f*cker of a problem if someone chose to abuse my child - that's not the same as someone of conscentual age preferring a pen0r over fagina.
As far as evolution goes - I don't even want to get into that because it is not related to the actual discussion at hand. Many so called h0mos were leading hetro lifestyles, thus procreating.
I'm a firm believer that main reason why h0moseksuality exists is because men just needed a rest from constant yapping, b!tching, complaining, and fights over the remote (do we watch monday night football or desparate housewives?) and occasional "you insensitive pr!ck, why didn't you put the toilet seat down!".
... that's my theory. Sometimes I wish I was in a plutonic relationship like that. Oh wait. I already am - it's called friendship. duh! :crazy: |
|
|
| lücid |
| quote: | Originally posted by FallingMoon
SOO you knew that I am going to kidnap myra during WMC & make lots of rolling babies with her?
I WIN! :toothless |
Rob knows i <3 you :happy2: |
|
|
| DJ RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by FallingMoon
SOO you knew that I am going to kidnap myra during WMC & make lots of rolling babies with her?
I WIN! :toothless |
I believe that was clear on NYE... :D |
|
|
| dj_alfi |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
anyway, i was thinking about the whole gay epidemic (sorry for calling it an epidemic like it's some sort of disease but i can't think of another word) and it's really surprising actually. i really think that there is a gay gene and i'm wondering if there is just a "glitch" if you will in our whole genetic make up, the more and more we reproduce.
|
epidemic is the right word!
| quote: |
i definitely believe in evolution...i'm not buying the whole Adam & Eve thing. |
How can you not believe in Adam & Eve? I mean, its in printing, black on white, in the holy book of Jesus!
| quote: |
but anyway...when it comes to homosexuality, i think it's wrong. and i don't mean because of my religious or spiritual beliefs. i'm talking about the basic science of it all. whoever or WHATever created us, didn't create us so that men should other men in the . it is very obvious what our was made to do, and that is to . if men were created to men, then don't u think men would be able to bare children?
|
men will never be able to have children. thats the sole purpose of the woman, apart from making the meals and entertaining the male with humoruous anekdotes or a lively song now and then. |
|
|
| wizniz |
we thought the angel of death on the black horse would come down and plague us with death
perhaps homosexuality is just a means of keeping our pop down?
im not gay bashing, just sayin |
|
|
| Ang ' ela_ie |
| quote: | Originally posted by EriK_V
close this thread already |
I dont think it needs to be closed.
I DO think it needs to have the title changed so that it in no way references terminology that I rank as low as the words n***** and s***, etc.
I think that people who dont have enough respect for the other members of a forum not to degrade them with such words shouldnt be able to discuss in the forum. |
|
|
| emc^2 |
| quote: | Originally posted by wizniz
we thought the angel of death on the black horse would come down and plague us with death
|
In a grand scheme of things the hom0seksuality is a non-factor. Only a tiny small fraction of population is 100%, "fagina is icky", kind of ghey. So, don't worry. people will still make lots of babies. Just visit your local trailer/caravan park to see for yourself. Now, the quality of said humanoid specimens is a totally different kind of story.
Besides, we're more likely to loose most of our population to global nuke stand off than to continued p00per seks.
| quote: | | perhaps homosexuality is just a means of keeping our pop down? |
did you mean to say "keeping p00p up, pop down" :stongue: |
|
|
| CharetCutestroy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Sorry but I believe your position regarding benefit is too narrow in it's consideration of what "benefit" is to be correct. Certainly homosexuality does not serve the obvious benefit of sexual relationships, which is procreation, however, that is not to say it serves no purpose for survival or is of no benefit.
From a biological point of view there may be great benefits from homosexuality. SOME homosexuality is corolated to genetic mutations. It is uncertain what other effects this genetic mutation my cause. It is possible that the mutation corrolated to male homosexuality is something that could be dangerous to the human species if it were present in a large population. If this were the case then the homosexuality could be a natural evolutionary response to rid humanity of the mutation by preventing the carriers of said mutation from procreating. Perhaps homosexuality is simply a built in population control to keep the numbers of humans down. Perhaps the prevention (or at least reduction in probablility) of procreation associated with the existance of homosexuality is in and of itself the benefit to society glenned from homosexuality.
|
Did you read the rest of my post? I agree about the fact that the sexual gratification can become it's own reason but then why would homosexual gratification be needed when there is already heterosexual gratification in place? The population control benefit was precisely the thing I went on to ponder in my next paragraph. But that is only a wild theory and there is no real evidence to connect overpopulation with homosexuality.
The social benefits would be valid maybe more in the times of Greece when it was less taboo and another large section of our population wasn't religiously opposed to it. Although I still believe it wasn't exactly socially acceptable then either. While it does provide social benefits within it's members and those who are accepting of it there is another very large (majority here in the US) section of the population that is against it which cancels out it's social benefits in my opinion.
Personally I think that gay marriage should be legal and I have nothing against them. I am also pretty anti-religious just for your information but I am just looking at this from a purely logical standpoint. |
|
|
| Steven Hays |
| quote: | Originally posted by emc^2
Slylee, think about it this way: What if I told you that probably 99% of your bedide activities could be considered sodomy not just by religious but even by state laws? In ancient times it ranged from execution to banishment to all kinds of nasty things. Even some states (granted, they're all south of Mason-Dixon line) have sodomy laws. Theoretically speaking, a bj can be considered a crime in NC and you can be imprisoned from 6mo - 3 years for it!!!!!
|
I think Slylee's intention of this thread is not to place a wrong or right connotation with homosexuals, but to understand why homosexuals are prevalent. She's not saying what you can and can't do, but what was meant to be done (aka intercourse to produce babies to further evolve and continue our species).
What is bedide by the way? It's not even a word... |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by RickyM
I believe I may have been misunderstood, or possibly used 'unnatural' in the wrong context. Obviously if there are queer dogs, chimps and dolphins at it with each other, as well as humans, then it must be completely natural :D :p (well according to Moral Hazard anyway)...I suppose I was relating more to the fact that I find it unnatural/wrong from a moral perspective, I didn't realise that I would get into an argument about it being natural because Charlie Chimp jerks off his best mate.
Of course I could really throw the cat among the pigeons and bring up the topic of bestiality or zoology as they call it...it happens in nature doesn't it?
Perhaps best leave that one for another day :D |
nice job discussing morality oblivious to the fact this thread has been trying to avoid the subjectivity of different morals in order to focus on the 'scientific' claims of slylee and others.
and if interspecies intercourse occurs between non-human animals alone aswell as between humans & animals, then you could very well bring it up, but it'd do you no good in this debate, because it doesn't pose any new obsticle. |
|
|
|
|
