Should homosexuals procreate?

[del]

I must have hit a nerve.

just don't call him short eyes.

 

[Sunni Man]

I must have hit a nerve.

Not really. You just make all kinds of bizarre and irrational statements.

Anguille, are you not able to debate the subject, so you have to resort to wild personal attacks?

 

[Anguille]

short eyes! Oh the memories ... hahaha!

 

[Anguille]

Not really. You just make all kinds of bizarre and irrational statements.

Anguille, are you not able to debate the subject, so you have to resort to wild personal attacks?

Wow!!! looks like I may be on to something, Shorty.

 

[Sunni Man]

Wow!!! looks like I may be on to something, Shorty.

Faslely ccusing people of being a child molester is totally uncalled for.

Your posts are being reported to the mods.

And as for me. Your postings will be ignored.

 

[Anguille]

Faslely ccusing people of being a child molester is totally uncalled for.

Your posts are being reported to the mods.

And as for me. Your postings will be ignored.

I am so honored to think you will be ignoring my posts.

 

[Anguille]

I will rephrase my censored hypothesis.
Is it possible that people who insist that pedophilia and homosexuality are one and the same are trying to keep their own pedophilia under the radar by stirring up hatred against gays?

 

[Larkinn]

So, to respect the humanity of all human beings we must celebrate their devaincies; even when such deviancies are proven to be detrimental to the culture and the health of their fellow man?

Proven to be detrimental? Not so much.

'Love the sinner, hate the sin...' as the saying goes, speaks to the certainty that some behavior is simply wrong... and while we do not reject the humanity of a given individual who engages in such behavior, we reject the behavior and shun, belittle and otherwise seek to ostrocise that individual until such time that they cange their behavior and ask that they be forgiven, thus allowed to re-congregate with their community.

Ostracization sure sounds like love...or not.

I personally have no problem with a queer as a human being; but I do not knowingly hire them and will dismiss them the instant I know them to be of such low moral character; I would never knowingly allow a queer, be they male or female to be left alone with any child for which I am responsible; as they have proven themself, through their behavior, prone to dismiss their better instincts and succumb to deviant sexual desires... and were I to find out that a person formerly trusted to not be such were sexually queer, such as a teacher, minister, etc... I'd dismiss them instantly as well, and if need be pulling my children from the school or church that refused to otherwise eject the deviant.

Good job being such a dickface.

Such has absolutely nothing to do with hate... it has to do with the judgment that queers are simply unfit for trust of any kind, at any level, based upon their proven inability to simply reject what is nothing more than an obsession...

Except that, again, many gays have highly productive, successful lives. So how is it an obsession for them?

Again... if one believes that their sexuality is personal, private and not suitable for public discourse; let me be the first to congratulate you and in so doing, emphatically adhere to that position; KEEP IT PRIVATE and we'll have no problems along that score...

Sure. So we can get rid of state sponsored marriage. Keep your breeder sex private. No more holding hands/kissing/whatever in public either. Sounds good.

In point of fact there is no such thing as a 'homophobe'.... Such is a myth perpetuated by a lying ideology.

The entire premise is founded in the Hegelian Paradox: Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis.

The premise is one on which the entirety of the leftist ideology rests...

Absolute and utter bullshit. As for your thesis/antithesis/synthesis, you should assume less.

 

[Sunni Man]

So, to respect the humanity of all human beings we must celebrate their devaincies; even when such deviancies are proven to be detrimental to the culture and the health of their fellow man?

I think not...

'Love the sinner, hate the sin...' as the saying goes, speaks to the certainty that some behavior is simply wrong... and while we do not reject the humanity of a given individual who engages in such behavior, we reject the behavior and shun, belittle and otherwise seek to ostrocise that individual until such time that they cange their behavior and ask that they be forgiven, thus allowed to re-congregate with their community.

I personally have no problem with a queer as a human being; but I do not knowingly hire them and will dismiss them the instant I know them to be of such low moral character; I would never knowingly allow a queer, be they male or female to be left alone with any child for which I am responsible; as they have proven themself, through their behavior, prone to dismiss their better instincts and succumb to deviant sexual desires... and were I to find out that a person formerly trusted to not be such were sexually queer, such as a teacher, minister, etc... I'd dismiss them instantly as well, and if need be pulling my children from the school or church that refused to otherwise eject the deviant.

Such has absolutely nothing to do with hate... it has to do with the judgment that queers are simply unfit for trust of any kind, at any level, based upon their proven inability to simply reject what is nothing more than an obsession...

Again... if one believes that their sexuality is personal, private and not suitable for public discourse; let me be the first to congratulate you and in so doing, emphatically adhere to that position; KEEP IT PRIVATE and we'll have no problems along that score...

Excellent post!!!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Actually it does; as for two homosexuals to procreate, the semen of the male must fertilize the egg of the female. Were homosexuals genetically distinct, a 'third gender' if you will, as we're lead to believe is the case, then nature would have provided a means by which homosexuals could procreate; were this 'special species' viable, then they would possess the means to advance that species. Homosexuals can not procreate within what would be their own 'special community' thus a homosexual is NOTHING except a person of a given gender which nature has marked as 'THE END OF THE GENETIC LINE' by slapping them with a sexual desire to breed with members of their own gender, which is inctestably a genetic DEAD END.

Genetics and evolution don't necessarily work that directly. Educate yourself.

SO... Genetics and evolution don't work directly? That's interesting? Particularly given that the issue here is the promulgation of the species... where a human is, for whatever reason, prone to desire sexual gratification with an element of the species of their same gender, which due to its biological design is unable to effect any means to promulgate the species.

So in essence all we're discussng is gender and the natural biological function of procreation, wherein the normal process of procreation is the hormonal influence to seek sexual gratification from a member of the same species of the opposite gender. Yet here we find you implying that nature would for some unstated reason set aside gender for promulgation... which would be pretty damn tough, given that if nature changed humanity to adapt to men to women, then in point of fact, men would be woman and queer would be straight and there wouldn't be a problem of men screwing men and women crotch humping other women...

It's not really all that complicated in the macro; despite your desperate efforts to make it seem that it is... In all likelihood, homosexuality is simply nature pulling the plug on weaker genetic lines; more than likely for the purposes of increasing the viability fo the species and reducing the population.

ROFLMNAO... Well that's absurd. Queers enjoy every single solitary right that their non-queer cousins enjoy. What queers want is SUPER-RIGHTS.

Incorrect.

LOL.. What a fabulous baseless opinion, ya have there! What I love about the Advocates of Social Science is how reticent you are of showing your intellectual math.

WHY IS IT INCORRECT? By that I and asking: WHAT RIGHTS DO NORMAL, NON-SEXUAL DEVIANTS ENJOY THAT SEXUAL DEVIANTS DO NOT? Please, just post a well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument where a HUMAN RIGHT is being usurped from queers... Not a privilege sponsored by the culture... a RIGHT. For instance... Marriage, the santicfied joining of two people into one entity is a right which stems from one's inherent right to life and the right to pursue the fulfillment of that life... It is a decision which is made where two people determien that they will live as one, raising their children together, operating a household together and otherwise caring for the needs of each other for the duration of their lives; swearing their sacred oathe before God and the community that they will faithfully carryout their vows of dedication to one another.

Now you're likely confusing that with a legal entity wherein the culture extends certain privileges and incentives designed to encourage such unions... wherein there are specific guidelines which must be met; not the least of which is that there can be no more than two in the union and each be of the opposite gender from the other... one male, one female.

Now the reason for that is that the culture wants to ENCOURAGE... healthy families, to the extent that is possible and towards that end establish these and a very few other very basic thresholds for couples to enjoy the privilege of legal marriage.

You see, the culture decidely does NOT want to encourage sexual deviancy thus they reject, time and again the legal unions of two people of the same gender. The thinking being that where the culture provides for the joining of two queers, the only potential result is that the culture will realize MORE QUEERS engaing in MORE SEXUAL DEVIANCY...

So if that's it, consider yourself checked... but f ya have something else floating around in that empty head... bring it.

As a hetero-sexual male, I can't marry my bestest-good buddy, so he can mooch off of my insurance... or enjoy the fruits of my labor by mooching off my pension in the wake of my death. As with the queers, if I want to make a family, I need to do so with a person of the opposite gender...

Now THAT IS EQUALITY sis...

No, its not. Equality is letting two people who love each other get married, regardless of gender. Thats equality.

It is? Are ya sure? I think what we're looking at here is what results from ignorance and an irrational notion of 'FAIRNESS' which you're apparently intellectual incapable of shaking... EQUAL Rights, means everyone has the same rights and the same opportunities to pursue the fulfillment of those rights. There is very little correlation between equality and fairness...



There is ABSOLUTELY NO LAW, ANYWHERE IN THE US, WHICH PREVENTS HOMOSEXUALS FROM GETTING MARRIED. PERIOD! If you know of such a law I'd love to see you provide it for the board's consideration...

Homosexuals are free to marry ANYONE that wants to marry them... Now for that marriage to be recognized BY THE STATE... those two people must be of the opposite gender; and that rule applies EQUALLY to EVERYONE; be they straight, queer or bi-freaklies...

Straight men can't marry other straight men... Straight women can't marry other straight women; although a queer Man CAN marry a queer Woman...


That's equality sis... Now you may think it FAIR... but fairness and equality are not synonymous concepts; despite the myth perpetuated by left-think.

Of course by the same token, 'it wasn't FAIR, that people without the financial means to pony up 20% and show a solid record of paying their debts were unable to 'own a home.' Your comrades decided to artificially induce the marketsto 'fix' that and in so doing may well have crippled the US economy in the process...

Wow, your one of those morons. What a surprise.

Wow! That's two baseless opinions advanced in response to as many issues... At least you're consistant.

So you'll pardon me if I reject the idea that FAIRNESS is analogous to equality... because the simple fact is, it is NOT... it never has and it never will be. These are two parallel concepts which in reality do NOT intersect and where idiots try to force them to do so, they will linevitably bring catstrophe, calamity and chaos.

Oh? Do explain how letting gays marry will cause "catstrophe, calamity and chaos".

Golly... That IS a toughy... Hmm.. lets see... Advancing cultural standards to encourage more members of the culture to engage in and otherwise celebrate deviant sexual practices; HOW could that cause catastrophe, calamity or chaos?

Well, deviant sexual practices tends toward the transmission of lethal viruses and otherwise dramatically increases the likelihood of exposing the culture to communicable diseases... The promotion of Homosexuality tends toward promoting the acceptance of other deviant sexual obsessions... Homosexuality tends toward discouraging procreation... Homosexuality tends towards gender confusion and so on.

That you can't find a basis for calamity through encouraging just those traits common to homosexuality listed above, says FAR more about your intellectual limitations... and your intellectual limitations are hardly a sound basis for encouraging those traits to expand throughout the culture.

Hey look sis, no one here has declared that homosexuals CAN'T procreate...

Sis? You assume too much, dumbass.

There's no assumption in that position, sis. I'm responding to the irrational feminine tone of your positions... If you want to be considered a male, then project a reasoned, accountable position common to masculinity.

Personally, I think it's awful that some men can't muster the discipline to focus their minds on soemthing beyond the deviant obsession to engage in sex with people of their same gender... And if they manage to procreate and then fall short, well more power to them.

Really, so gay men can't muster the discripline to focus their minds on something other than gay sex?

So Barney Frank got into the US Congress by focusing on just gay sex? Why don't you explain that one to us all.

LOL... I can see you're struggling with context. It's odd that you complain about the inference you generate through your feminine advocacy of faggery and the ONE example you hold up is Bawney Fwank... ROFLMNAO... Oh GOD that's precious... but I digress...

I can say to a certainty that I've know evidence of Bawney Fwank having ever focused his sexual obsession on anything except people of his same gender. Which would of course incude the period where Bawney and his boyfriend were running a queer prostitution business out of Bawney's DC apawtment...

But in reality, if nature want's their genetic code out of the pool, then that code will be out of the pool... I'm not nature, so I don't have all the answers;

Learn more about evolution. Nature isn't a single thing, its a process. It doesn't have desires, it just is.

Wow, so there is something in the theory of evolution wherein you're able to show, conclusively, that 'things' are never comprised of individuals processes and that such processes can't be summed to anything correlating to sentience...

Well I have to I can't WAIT to here you support this one.

(Let the record reflect that I am alony making this challenge to further expose this member as fool... it is a 100% certainty that this imbecile will be unable to post ANY ARGUMENT wherein it is cnclusively established that "THINGS" are NEVER comprised of 'processes' and that 'processes' in and of themselves establish an absence of sentience.)

And just as certain, where a culture tolerates homosexuality; particularly to allow such to raise children, that culture can only expect that this deviance will grow in numbers and that such will and MUST lead to a decline in that culture's integrity...

Well no wonder the Greeks died out.....oh wait....

Oh another of those whose ignorance forces them to believe that what stands in Greece today is the same culture as the the City states of Ancient Greece...
"Hey Buddy, just because a culture encouraged homosexuality in their citizenry and collapsed, is no reason that our culture shouldn't encouage homosexuality in our citizenry... TOGA! TOGA! TOGA!'

ROFL! Leftists... You people crack me up... !

Now that you want to believe that all queers are out there raising children and having normal happy lives, is a delusion of your own creation; in fact, homoseuxality and the lifestyle associated with it, is a disaster for most homosexuals...

Do you even know anyone who is gay? Gays, like straights, obviously aren't all happy. But many of them are, in similar proportions to straights. Their sexuality doesn't define them and they have other hopes and dreams and desires.

LOL... Isn't that the way it always is? Someone that refers to themselves as 'a homosexual' doesn't define themselves, their dreams, hopes or desires through their sexuality...

"SO tell me Rufus, what one word would you say best defines you; your dreams, hopes and desires?"

"Well... I guessssssss the one word that bessssst dessscribessss me is "I'm GAAaaaaY"


"That's two words... "

"Ssstill GAaaaY!'

the culture accepting it and nurturing these pervs doesn't change it a BIT. The fact is that homosexuality is the genetic end of the line, when practiced as preached... and there's no gettign around that.

No getting around that....except for IVF. And homosexuality isn't preached.
Its not an ideology, its a sexual preference.

ROFL... Yeah, IVF is a natural way to go for Homosexuals... Queer ED and Fag George are in Love and want to have a baby... Of Ed and George, which one provides the Egg to fertilze? How about this one? Lez and Sally are in a 'committed relationship and desperately want to express their love through a child... which one provides the sperm?


Homosexuality isn't preached? Really? Then perhaps you'll explain this little jewel...

"WE'RE QUEER! WE'RE HERE! GET USED TO IT!!!"

(For the board: the premise being advanced by this member is that 'homosexuals really aren't homoseuxals' they're out there engaging in hetero sex 'all the time...' It's the classic rationalization where the facts are denied to project normalcy while promoting deviancy... and frankly, IT IS HYSTERICAL... in at least two contexts and on several levels.)

Again with the assumptions. I never advanced that premise. But nice job making that shit up.

LOL... Ain't delusion GRAND kids?

 

[newpolitics]

So, to respect the humanity of all human beings we must celebrate their devaincies; even when such deviancies are proven to be detrimental to the culture and the health of their fellow man?

I think not...

'Love the sinner, hate the sin...' as the saying goes, speaks to the certainty that some behavior is simply wrong... and while we do not reject the humanity of a given individual who engages in such behavior, we reject the behavior and shun, belittle and otherwise seek to ostrocise that individual until such time that they cange their behavior and ask that they be forgiven, thus allowed to re-congregate with their community.

I personally have no problem with a queer as a human being; but I do not knowingly hire them and will dismiss them the instant I know them to be of such low moral character; I would never knowingly allow a queer, be they male or female to be left alone with any child for which I am responsible; as they have proven themself, through their behavior, prone to dismiss their better instincts and succumb to deviant sexual desires... and were I to find out that a person formerly trusted to not be such were sexually queer, such as a teacher, minister, etc... I'd dismiss them instantly as well, and if need be pulling my children from the school or church that refused to otherwise eject the deviant.

Such has absolutely nothing to do with hate... it has to do with the judgment that queers are simply unfit for trust of any kind, at any level, based upon their proven inability to simply reject what is nothing more than an obsession...

Again... if one believes that their sexuality is personal, private and not suitable for public discourse; let me be the first to congratulate you and in so doing, emphatically adhere to that position; KEEP IT PRIVATE and we'll have no problems along that score...

You're a fuckin' asshole

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

You're a fuckin' asshole

And may I just say, what a joy it is to find that the width and breadth of the intellect of the Advocates of Social Science remains indiscernable...

 

[newpolitics]

And may I just say, what a joy it is to find that the width and breadth of the intellect of the Advocates of Social Science remains indiscernable...

I'm tired of tried to be nice to people like you. No amount of logic will effect any kind of change, or progress the arguement past what you are able to let yourself believe, so what's the point in niceties or any atttempt at logic. It's more efficient, in this instance, to get straight to the point.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I'm tired of tried to be nice to people like you.

Sis, it's not a question of 'being nice;' I've no concern for your courtesy... I'm interested SOLELY in the argument which you bring to the table. Now FTR: your argument is a logical fallacy, wherein you overtly sought to avoid the issue at hand and instead hurl vacuous insults at your opposition; your argument is therefore logically INVALID and your reasoning is unsound, which makes the next breath of your latest failure ABSOLUTELY PRECIOUS:

No amount of logic will effect any kind of change, or progress the arguement...

Here's a clue... Logic is not a function of volume... Logic concerns itself with the construct of the calculation, thus your feelings that the volume of logic applied is relevant, explains why you're so prone to advance calculations which are logical train-wrecks, invalid and as a result: Irrelevant FAILURES...AKA:

Now your problem is that you need to 'feel' that deviant behavior is just fine; you really WANT it to be OK... its even fairly likely that you're own ass suffices as a cock pocket and you really need to believe that you being a pathetic sexual deviant is perfectly acceptable.

But here's the thing about that though... It's not and for a host of EXCELLENT reasons; which are at the source of the ancient taboos prohibiting it.

 

[Sunni Man]

You're a fuckin' asshole

Is this an example of your logic?

 

[Sunni Man]

I just don't understand why people defend homos?

They are just disease ridden perverts, who are engaging is subhuman behavior.

They conntribute nothing positive to society.

Any farmer or rancher who had an animal behave the way homos act.

They would be immediatly culled from the heard and eliminated.

 

[Gem]

Sunni Man Blathered:

I just don't understand why people defend homos?

Maybe because people who are homosexual are still humans, still worthwhile valid individuals...and because you can disapprove of one thing that someone does and still choose to view them as human beings deserving of all of the rights and protections all other human beings enjoy?

They are just disease ridden perverts, who are engaging is subhuman behavior.

Nonsense. There are many, many, many American heterosexuals who are diseased ridden perverts...and many, many, many American homosexuals who are clean, disease free individuals. Safety when engaging in sex practices is a vital issue, whether you are gay or straight.

Heterosexuals also have been known to engage in anal sex, bdsdm, fetishes, etc. So therefore homosexuals who engage in homosexual acts are no more "subhuman" that heterosexuals who engage in similar acts.

They conntribute nothing positive to society.

Truman Capote, Tennesse Williams, Alexander the Great, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, Virginia Woolf, Sophocles, Gore Vidal, Nathan Lane, Julius Ceasar to name a few homosexuals or bisexuals

Any farmer or rancher who had an animal behave the way homos act.
They would be immediatly culled from the heard and eliminated.

Gosh youre just a little ball of anti-gay rage without a clue about what actually exists and happens in the really-real world, aren't you?

Rhesus Monkeys Engage in Homosexual Behavior...Last I Checked, We Weren't Rounding up all Their Immoral Hairy Asses and Slamming Them Into Little Monkey Gas Chambers....
SpringerLink - Journal Article

Scientists Observe Beetles and Cows Engaging in Homosexual Behavior...And For Some Unknown Reason Don't Pull Out Machine Guns and Kill Every Beetle and Cow They See
University of Florida News - UF Research Ties Homosexual Behavior In Beetle To Evolution

List of Animals That Have Been Observed Engaging In Homosexual Behavior...Quick! Kill Them All!
Wikipedia: List of animals displaying homosexual behavior | Woosk

A Gay Sheep! OH THE HORROR!
Gay sheep may shed light on sexuality


Bottom line, Sunni Man...in your rush to hate and condemn...you came up with ridiculous and poor arguments. In the future, you'd be far better off to simply state, "I don't agree with homosexuality for many reasons...but that doesn't mean that I hate or wish harm on those that are gay." Otherwise you just come across as looking like an insane and violent bigot.

 

[Sunni Man]

You are the one who compared homo behavior to various animals and insects.

So basically I am correct in saying that sodomites are borderline subhumans.

I am glad that we agree on this point.

 

[Gem]

Sunni Man Wrote:

You are the one who compared homo behavior to various animals and insects.
So basically I am correct in saying that sodomites are borderline subhumans.
I am glad that we agree on this point.

You're forgetting your own posts, now? Thats kinda sad. Here, I'll help you out - You stated that farmers would kill any of their livestock that engaged in homosexual behavior...I provided you with numerous examples of animals engaging in homosexual behavior (cows included, of course)...and no evidence of massive animal killings by their owners or observers.

You made a bigoted and ridiculous statement...that has been shown to be demonstrably false.

You can't rile me on this one by claiming that I am some how for, or against, homosexuality, Sunni...I support an adult's right to engage in whatever type of sexual activity they chose to engage in with another consenting adult, so stop wasting your time making those silly little jibes and simply deal with the fact that you made a brash and silly post that has been debunked.

There is nothing wrong with not approving of homosexuality for your own reasons...that is your right as an individual. However, lying about it or making up ridiculous statements like homosexual animals would immediately be put to death...just makes you look stupid.

I don't think thats the look you were going for...so I kindly stepped in to help you out...don't worry, you don't need to thank me out loud...I know you're saying it on the inside.

 

[Sunni Man]

However, lying about it or making up ridiculous statements like homosexual animals would immediately be put to death...

I grew up around farms and ranches in Oklahoma.

If a rancher had a bull that wouldn't mount the cows of the herd for breeding. Or was confused as to what to mount.

They were culled from the herd and sold to the slaughter.

This goes for horses, sheep, cows, goats, etc.

Homos are No different, and should be culled from human society.