Attempted suicides double after reassignment surgery

[XponentialChaos]

You tolerate them every day.

The issue is homosexuality leads to no drive to mate with the opposite sex, if the primary goal of biological life in general is to pass on its genes, that lack of drive is a defect.

This is all a subset of the forced acceptance vs. tolerance argument. From forcing bakers to bake cakes for SSM weddings, to requiring kids to be taught pride agendas, to allowing parents or doctors to drug and mutilate minors.

Lines have to be drawn somewhere.

Not everyone wants to have children. Is that a problem to you? They’re not doing the “primary goal of biological life” either. Should they be tolerated?

 

[martybegan]

Not everyone wants to have children. Is that a problem to you? They’re not doing the “primary goal of biological life” either.

By choice. Again, I am not arguing social constructs or free will, just simple biological facts.

 

[OldFlame]

By choice. Again, I am not arguing social constructs or free will, just simple biological facts.

He doesn't have an answer for your argument of biological facts, so he has to divert to something else.

 

[martybegan]

He doesn't have an answer for your argument of biological facts, so he has to divert to something else.

To me what adults do doesn't interest me as long as I am not forced to go along for the ride.

Also, using pseudo-scientific/intellectual arguments to force acceptance over simple tolerance doesn't pass muster with me either.

Then the whole "lets drug and mutilate kids" thing just makes the whole thing insane.

 

[XponentialChaos]

By choice. Again, I am not arguing social constructs or free will, just simple biological facts.

So choosing not to have children is fine to you. But lacking the ability to have children is not fine to you?

 

[martybegan]

So choosing not to have children is fine to you. But lacking the ability to have children is not fine to you?

It's nothing to me either way. Again, it's about saying homosexuality is normal or default as an excuse to force acceptance of it vs. just asking for tolerance.

 

[Blisterfinger]

Just sayin‘.

Probably because you're less likely to get a free ride on the government in red States. Natural selection at play

 

[XponentialChaos]

It's nothing to me either way. Again, it's about saying homosexuality is normal or default as an excuse to force acceptance of it vs. just asking for tolerance.

Looks like we’re going around in circles again.

Sorry, I tried.

 

[HeyNorm]

Social stigma drives the former and rampant drug use the later

When you do something ridiculous to yourself, and expect you won’t think you will be ridiculed for doing it? You have serious mental issues……

as do the people who support your ridiculousness

 

[braalian]

When you do something ridiculous to yourself, and expect you won’t think you will be ridiculed for doing it? You have serious mental issues……

as do the people who support your ridiculousness

What does that have to do with what I said?

 

[braalian]

The issue is homosexuality leads to no drive to mate with the opposite sex, if the primary goal of biological life in general is to pass on its genes, that lack of drive is a defect.

In Many other mammal species, the males fight, often to the death, to demonstrate who the alpha is and who gets to impregnate all the females. Only the biggest and strongest get to pass on their genes.

Should we go back to that, too?

 

[HeyNorm]

What does that have to do with what I said?

Stating the obvious

 

[BS Filter]

That’s not how it works….

99% of homosexuals and transsexuals have straight parents

No shit.

 

[DGS49]

People who undergo those hideous surgeries.

• will never have an orgasm,
• will never have a child,
• will never have an intimate relationship.

Which is why, if it is done while they are a minor - even if they really, really, really, really want it - the parents should be prosecuted for child abuse.

 

[DGS49]

Putting trans and homo's in the same category - as in LGBT, etc - is insane.

 

[martybegan]

Looks like we’re going around in circles again.

Sorry, I tried.

Not circles, you expect me to fit the model of someone who argues against homosexuality on religious grounds. My argument is limited to not forcing acceptance of it on people, merely getting them to tolerate it.
'

 

[martybegan]

In Many other mammal species, the males fight, often to the death, to demonstrate who the alpha is and who gets to impregnate all the females. Only the biggest and strongest get to pass on their genes.

Should we go back to that, too?

Why do you think hunky guys get laid more?

We just replaced combat with other forms of competition, and we aren't in survival mode like all animals are.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Not circles, you expect me to fit the model of someone who argues against homosexuality on religious grounds. My argument is limited to not forcing acceptance of it on people, merely getting them to tolerate it.
'

Still looks totally inconsistent to me. To each their own.

 

[braalian]

Why do you think hunky guys get laid more?

We just replaced combat with other forms of competition, and we aren't in survival mode like all animals are.

Which is my point

As a species, we've moved beyond procreation being the whole point of our existence.

So same sex couple “violating nature” is irrelevant. We’re beyond all that

 

[HeyNorm]

Which is my point

As a species, we've moved beyond procreation being the whole point of our existence.

So same sex couple “violating nature” is irrelevant. We’re beyond all that

And without procreation there is no species. It is as relevant today as it ever was.