The Homosexual Dilemma

[Conservative65]

1. The homos are damn sure demanding the rest of us not just acknowledge their choice but that we agree with it and don't say anything other than you agree with it.

Really now? No one is saying you have to agree with it or even acknowledge it. Hyperbole much?

2. You have to watch every word in order that those freaks don't get their panties in a wad.

No. You can say what you want. However there is such a thing as manners. You may lack them.

3. It would be for the freak of nature that thought HE was a girl and approached my daughter.

Seriously dude - if a transgender person felt he was a female he's hardly likely to approach your daughter.

4. Teebowing happens when someone actually accomplishes something.

Like what?

5. You think being a freak is normal. When daily new stories put those abnormal freaks on the screen, you don't have to look.

I don't care about what's normal or abnormal - a lot of that is cultural. Inside it are real people with feelings. And they aren't hurting you any. So if you can't stomach it - change the channel. I get nauseous at the overflow of hate from fundamentalists. So I change the channel. UInless you're a quadroplegic..I suggest you do the same.

1. When they use judges to "make" law, they demand it.

Like black folks "demanded" that judges "make law" and end antimiscegenation laws? Court after court has overturned same sex marriage bans and they've represented a variety of judges.

2. No you can't or one of the confused freaks might get offended.

People say offensive stuff all the time. It's not illegal, it's just a display of bad manners. Expect to have the same dished back. You guys sure are a bunch of whiners.

3. I meant even SPEAK to her.

Then put your daughter in an all girls private school. Situation solved.

4. Guess you don't know how the term originated.

Sure I do. Then he became a religious rightwing hero solely because he performed religious observances on the playing field.

5. There's nothing cultural about being a sexually confused freak of nature. Sounds as if you may be one of them.

They're people. They aren't hurting you or anyone else. So leave them alone dude. Are they making you question your masculinity or something?

1. Difference between something you have no choice over and one you do.

2. NO one has a right not to be offended. I don't care what anyone calls me but the peter puffers do.

3. Don't let the freaks who don't realize having a penis means you're male in a restroom where they don't belong.

4. AFTER accomplishing something.

5. I'll leave them alone when they stop demanding I accept their freak way of life. I see you use the typical but weak argument. No need to worry about my masculinity. I do things the way nature intended with the opposite sex.

 

[Skylar]

... and virtually every culture that has rejected homosexuality has also fallen. If you were to look at the span of human history, almost all cultures that ever existed fell. Your implications of 'causation' are thus proven silly nonsense.

So you feel that despite the probabilities for survival being bleak.... that a culture should ratchet up the odds of it doom by adopting policy which can only assure such?

Laughing......the eternal America ...

First America was not at issue, yet there ya are setting it as first in your responding priories.

Its the civilization I live in. So its immediately relevant to your delusions of my 'probability for survival'. And the idea of America's eternal survival is silly nonsense. Of course its going to fall eventually. Be it decades or centuries or millennia, who knows.

But no civilization, in the history of earth...has lasted eternally. All of them eventually collapse. If they accept homosexuality. If they don't. It doesn't matter. They fall either way.

Demonstrating the absurdity of your claims of 'causation'. As your 'effect' happens regardless of the existence of your imagined 'cause'.

 

[80zephyr]

Illogical and abnormal are when a person does not follow natures plan. A person who likes blow up dolls is illogical and abnormal.

Is he having fun? Sure. Doesn't make any less illiogical and abnormal.

Mark

And how, pray tell....does masturbation follow 'nature's plan'? How does celibacy? What part of nature's plan is satisfied by nana and pop-pop knocking boots? How about blowjobs......illogical and abnormal?

As each of these acts has as much chance of producing children as say, a pair of lesbians making out.

Your folly is in assuming that there's no logical reason to have sex save procreation. And that's absurd. Its logical to have sex if it simply feels good. You could use it for bonding. You could use it for stress relief. Hell, you could use it for cardio. It could carry some religious significance. It could be to comfort someone.

Your assessment of 'logical' and 'normal' is illogical and irrational. As it ignores a plethora of logical reasons to have sex, and ignores them for no other reason than its inconvenient to your argument.

I am not the one to make what I said logical and normal. Nature does that. I am only telling you what nature tells us.

Mark

Says you. And you're not Nature. You can't make your claims work logically or rationally. So you use a tired and rather predictable fallacy of logic called 'Appeal to Authority'. Where something must be so because the 'Authority' said it was.

Nature hasn't said shit. You have. And sex can logically serve many, many purposes beyond procreation. Just as eating can serve many, many more purposes than merely fueling the body.

But just for giggles, I want to hear you say it. Tell us that an old married couple having sex is illogical and abnormal. I mean, if you really believe your standard, it should be easy.

If you don't......you'll give us some excuse for why you won't.

Old men and women having sex is perfectly normal. Like I stated earlier, the sex drive is second only to self preservation in evolution.

And how do old people having sex in any way serve 'evolution' or in any way add to 'self preservation'? Explain it to us. As their sex is as reproductively fruitful as any same sex couple.

You said any sex that doesn't serve 'nature's plan' is illogical and abnormal. How do old people serve 'nature's plan'. Or the infertile having sex? Or anyone on birth control? Or the celibate? Or masturbation? Or oral sex?

You've painted yourself into a corner, Mark. As there are all kind of unproductive sexual activities that serve a litany of logical, completely normal purposes. But you've left yourself no room to wiggle in, forced to ignore every single one of those purposes by your past rhetoric.

So explain it to us. Just don't step on any of the wet paint.

I have explained it to you. In evolution, the drive to reproduce is what CAUSES ALL THESE THINGS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

It is not about "fun", evolutionarily, its about reproduction. If you want to have fun with sex, knock yourself out. But, the only reason you want to have that fun is because your body is telling you to. As a man, I need to ejaculate on a consistent basis. When I have that need, I would rather do it with a women. But, if none is available, my body tells me I need that release to stop "feeling horny".

This is simply basic human nature. I thought the left believed in science and evolution.

Mark

 

[Skylar]

All 50 states exist in Nature and are dependent upon Nature for their continued existence... where ANY state rejects the moral foundation intrinsic IN Nature, the state sets itself to suffer the otherwise unavoidable and catastrophic consequences of their failure to respect the laws in nature which govern human behavior.

Nature doesn't have 'morality'. Rendering all of your babble after that fallacy moot.

Thus for law to be valid, it must rest upon the soundly reasoned morality inherent in natural law... or such law leads the state toward its certain demise. AND where the fate of THAT state is intrinsically tied to others, its demise endangers the viability of the whole of that subsequent Union.

There is no 'natural law of marriage'. Nature has fucking. We invented marriage. And it means whatever we say it means.

Sigh....you keep trying to use your 'Appeal to Authority' fallacy. And keep failing, as your claims have no logical or rational basis.

 

[80zephyr]

Since when is consent a requisite of marriage? Do the Muslims know this? BTW, you cannot meet every requirement of marriage. You cannot procreate. Hell you can't even consummate the marriage.

Mark

Could you site the law in any of the 50 States where procreation is a requirement of Civil Marriage?

What about State laws that require a couple be INFERTILE and therefore unable to procreate?

Thank you in advance.


>>>>

If you don't understand the concept by now, another post probably will not help you.

Mark

 

[nodoginnafight]

"Of course there is a need for gender in marriage."

Of course there is not.
There was a lot of slavery in history too.
Poor argument - try again.

Why would I? You have nothing to rebut what marriage was(and is) for thousands of years. You can call to men "married", but it won't make it so.

Mark

I can see the idiocy of your argument is very well ingrained.

Lemme make it more simple since apparently you need that.

The fact that something was done in history doesn't mean it was right. It's like saying, "we've ALWAYS made the blacks drink from that fountain."

It's a stupid argument. Every time you repeat it - you just look stupid all over again.

 

[80zephyr]

All 50 states exist in Nature and are dependent upon Nature for their continued existence... where ANY state rejects the moral foundation intrinsic IN Nature, the state sets itself to suffer the otherwise unavoidable and catastrophic consequences of their failure to respect the laws in nature which govern human behavior.

Nature doesn't have 'morality'. Rendering all of your babble after that fallacy moot.

Thus for law to be valid, it must rest upon the soundly reasoned morality inherent in natural law... or such law leads the state toward its certain demise. AND where the fate of THAT state is intrinsically tied to others, its demise endangers the viability of the whole of that subsequent Union.

There is no 'natural law of marriage'. Nature has fucking. We invented marriage. And it means whatever we say it means.

Sigh....you keep trying to use your 'Appeal to Authority' fallacy. And keep failing, as your claims have no logical or rational basis.

You are WRONG. Nature "invented" marriage when it demanded that a man has to have sex with a women for procreation.

"Marriage" is simply the word we use to describe the process nature intended. That you want to redefine the word will not change its meaning.

Mark

 

[Skylar]

It is not about "fun", evolutionarily, its about reproduction.

More accurately, sex is about fun AND is can be about reproduction. The fun part is the reward for the act. And the good sensations are more than a logical and normal reason to do it.

But I digress.......how do old people having sex in any way serve 'evolution' or in any way add to 'self preservation'? Explain it to us. You've said that sex is about reproduction. And they can't reproduce. Thus, what possible purpose could be served in their copulation if sex is ONLY about reproduction?

Corner, meet Mark. Enjoy the paint.

 

[80zephyr]

"Of course there is a need for gender in marriage."

Of course there is not.
There was a lot of slavery in history too.
Poor argument - try again.

Why would I? You have nothing to rebut what marriage was(and is) for thousands of years. You can call to men "married", but it won't make it so.

Mark

I can see the idiocy of your argument is very well ingrained.

Lemme make it more simple since apparently you need that.

The fact that something was done in history doesn't mean it was right. It's like saying, "we've ALWAYS made the blacks drink from that fountain."

It's a stupid argument. Every time you repeat it - you just look stupid all over again.

"We" didn't create marriage. Nature did. We simply named it.

Your comparison to blacks at a fountain...now, that's stupid.

Mark

 

[nodoginnafight]

I'm be glad when the middle schools crank back up and we won't have to be exposed to moronic arguments like Zephyr's

 

[Skylar]

You are WRONG. Nature "invented" marriage when it demanded that a man has to have sex with a women for procreation.

Obvious nonsense. Nature is about reproduction. How that is done is reproductively irrelevant. Rape passes genetic material. Sex with reproductively viable children passes genetic material. I wouldn't consider either to be particularly 'moral', nor the 'invention of nature'. But they serve your 'nature's plan', don't they?

As do polygamy, one night stands, harems, orgies, gang bangs, etc..

If marriage were intrinsic to nature, then anything that reproduces would be married. Yet only we are.....because its our invention. A social construct we made up for our own convenience. And it is whatever we say it is.

Our construct isn't particularly connected to reproduction. The infertile can marry. The old can marry. The childless get all the same benefits of marriage as those with children. No one is required to have children or be able to have them in order to get married.

Why then would we exclude gays from marriage based on their inability to meet a standard that doesn't exist and applies to no one?

 

[80zephyr]

It is not about "fun", evolutionarily, its about reproduction.

More accurately, sex is about fun AND is can be about reproduction. The fun part is the reward for the act. And the good sensations are more than a logical and normal reason to do it.

But I digress.......how do old people having sex in any way serve 'evolution' or in any way add to 'self preservation'? Explain it to us. You've said that sex is about reproduction. And they can't reproduce. Thus, what possible purpose could be served in their copulation if sex is ONLY about reproduction?

Corner, meet Mark. Enjoy the paint.

If you didn't understand my last explanation, I cannot help you. But, you are getting there when you stated that "fun is the reward for the act".

Yes, it is. As nature set up so that the species would perpetuate itself.

Mark

 

[PaintMyHouse]

For the record, two gays are not "having sex". Sex is when a penis goes into a vagina. Anything else is not sex.

Millions upon millions of teenage girls will be thrilled to hear this, their parents not so much.

It wasn't sex daddy, I was just blowing him.

You can call a blow job sex, it won't make it so.

I suppose you believe that sucking on someones toes is having sex as well..

When your teenage daughter has some kid's cock in her mouth, that's sex, dummy.

 

[Coyote]

1. The homos are damn sure demanding the rest of us not just acknowledge their choice but that we agree with it and don't say anything other than you agree with it.

Really now? No one is saying you have to agree with it or even acknowledge it. Hyperbole much?

2. You have to watch every word in order that those freaks don't get their panties in a wad.

No. You can say what you want. However there is such a thing as manners. You may lack them.

3. It would be for the freak of nature that thought HE was a girl and approached my daughter.

Seriously dude - if a transgender person felt he was a female he's hardly likely to approach your daughter.

4. Teebowing happens when someone actually accomplishes something.

Like what?

5. You think being a freak is normal. When daily new stories put those abnormal freaks on the screen, you don't have to look.

I don't care about what's normal or abnormal - a lot of that is cultural. Inside it are real people with feelings. And they aren't hurting you any. So if you can't stomach it - change the channel. I get nauseous at the overflow of hate from fundamentalists. So I change the channel. UInless you're a quadroplegic..I suggest you do the same.

1. When they use judges to "make" law, they demand it.

Like black folks "demanded" that judges "make law" and end antimiscegenation laws? Court after court has overturned same sex marriage bans and they've represented a variety of judges.

2. No you can't or one of the confused freaks might get offended.

People say offensive stuff all the time. It's not illegal, it's just a display of bad manners. Expect to have the same dished back. You guys sure are a bunch of whiners.

3. I meant even SPEAK to her.

Then put your daughter in an all girls private school. Situation solved.

4. Guess you don't know how the term originated.

Sure I do. Then he became a religious rightwing hero solely because he performed religious observances on the playing field.

5. There's nothing cultural about being a sexually confused freak of nature. Sounds as if you may be one of them.

They're people. They aren't hurting you or anyone else. So leave them alone dude. Are they making you question your masculinity or something?

1. Difference between something you have no choice over and one you do.

That's debatable. At this point in time, most research seems to point at sexual orientation in homosexuals being hard-wired with distinct biological differences in brain chemistry and other things.

2. NO one has a right not to be offended. I don't care what anyone calls me but the peter puffers do.

Uh...isn't that what I just said dude? I suspect there are things people could say to you that would offend and anger you, just like any other human being. That said - people have a right to say and those offended have the right to say something in return. You do understand that right?

3. Don't let the freaks who don't realize having a penis means you're male in a restroom where they don't belong.

You're too hung up on anatomy. Ever heard of hermaphrodites?

4. AFTER accomplishing something.

His accomplishment was not what was hailed - his Christian demonstrations were what made him a rightwing hero. I suspect a number of pro athletes who publically came out of the closet also have athletic achievements on their records.

5. I'll leave them alone when they stop demanding I accept their freak way of life. I see you use the typical but weak argument. No need to worry about my masculinity. I do things the way nature intended with the opposite sex.

No one is demanding you "accept" anything. Ever heard of ignore?

 

[80zephyr]

I'm be glad when the middle schools crank back up and we won't have to be exposed to moronic arguments like Zephyr's

As a debater, you are not very good at this. As to my education, I figure I could put it up against yours, any day.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

For the record, two gays are not "having sex". Sex is when a penis goes into a vagina. Anything else is not sex.

Millions upon millions of teenage girls will be thrilled to hear this, their parents not so much.

It wasn't sex daddy, I was just blowing him.

You can call a blow job sex, it won't make it so.

I suppose you believe that sucking on someones toes is having sex as well..

When your teenage daughter has some kid's cock in her mouth, that's sex, dummy.

Well, I am new here, and it is taking me a little time to get a handle on the posters. You just love to be rude and crude. I suppose I can accept that, for a while at least.

As to your "point". That is called foreplay. And it can lead to sex. If you don't believe me, look it up.

Mark

 

[Dogmaphobe]

"We" didn't create marriage. Nature did. We simply named it.

Your comparison to blacks at a fountain...now, that's stupid.

Mark

"WE" named it?

and here I thought I was getting old. You must be in the thousands by now.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

First America was not at issue, yet there ya are setting it as first in your responding priories.

Its the civilization I live in. ...

Huh... yet your first priority was to cite "America", a concept with which you have absolutely no kinship.

Folks... the disordered mind is a marvel of random output, isn't it?

The Ideological Left is the "Magic 8-Ball" of intellects.

Ask them anything and you've a 1-20 chance of seeing: "It is decidedly so." And the odds that you'll get absolutely NO REASONING for the response, matches the 8 Ball's incredible 100%.

And for precisely the same reason: It can't REASON.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So the sex drive in humans is there to "have fun", and not for procreation?

That is correct.

You simply don't have a clue as how evolution works, do you?

Oh but I do, and it doesn't work as you believe.

 

[Conservative65]

1. The homos are damn sure demanding the rest of us not just acknowledge their choice but that we agree with it and don't say anything other than you agree with it.

Really now? No one is saying you have to agree with it or even acknowledge it. Hyperbole much?

2. You have to watch every word in order that those freaks don't get their panties in a wad.

No. You can say what you want. However there is such a thing as manners. You may lack them.

3. It would be for the freak of nature that thought HE was a girl and approached my daughter.

Seriously dude - if a transgender person felt he was a female he's hardly likely to approach your daughter.

4. Teebowing happens when someone actually accomplishes something.

Like what?

5. You think being a freak is normal. When daily new stories put those abnormal freaks on the screen, you don't have to look.

I don't care about what's normal or abnormal - a lot of that is cultural. Inside it are real people with feelings. And they aren't hurting you any. So if you can't stomach it - change the channel. I get nauseous at the overflow of hate from fundamentalists. So I change the channel. UInless you're a quadroplegic..I suggest you do the same.

1. When they use judges to "make" law, they demand it.

Like black folks "demanded" that judges "make law" and end antimiscegenation laws? Court after court has overturned same sex marriage bans and they've represented a variety of judges.

2. No you can't or one of the confused freaks might get offended.

People say offensive stuff all the time. It's not illegal, it's just a display of bad manners. Expect to have the same dished back. You guys sure are a bunch of whiners.

3. I meant even SPEAK to her.

Then put your daughter in an all girls private school. Situation solved.

4. Guess you don't know how the term originated.

Sure I do. Then he became a religious rightwing hero solely because he performed religious observances on the playing field.

5. There's nothing cultural about being a sexually confused freak of nature. Sounds as if you may be one of them.

They're people. They aren't hurting you or anyone else. So leave them alone dude. Are they making you question your masculinity or something?

1. Difference between something you have no choice over and one you do.

That's debatable. At this point in time, most research seems to point at sexual orientation in homosexuals being hard-wired with distinct biological differences in brain chemistry and other things.

2. NO one has a right not to be offended. I don't care what anyone calls me but the peter puffers do.

Uh...isn't that what I just said dude? I suspect there are things people could say to you that would offend and anger you, just like any other human being. That said - people have a right to say and those offended have the right to say something in return. You do understand that right?

3. Don't let the freaks who don't realize having a penis means you're male in a restroom where they don't belong.

You're too hung up on anatomy. Ever heard of hermaphrodites?

4. AFTER accomplishing something.

His accomplishment was not what was hailed - his Christian demonstrations were what made him a rightwing hero. I suspect a number of pro athletes who publically came out of the closet also have athletic achievements on their records.

5. I'll leave them alone when they stop demanding I accept their freak way of life. I see you use the typical but weak argument. No need to worry about my masculinity. I do things the way nature intended with the opposite sex.

No one is demanding you "accept" anything. Ever heard of ignore?

1. Who is doing the research?

2. If I get offended, it's my problem. I thought I said I don't care what they call me or say about me. The problem is when the peter puffers get offended, they don't say anything, they whine and sue becasue someone doesn't like what they are.

3. When my daughers were born, the doctor said in both cases you have daughers based on one thing only. I'll put her medical training up against less than 1/10 of one percent.

4. He didn't Tebow unless he accomplished something. NO different than any other player dancing around when they did the same thing.

5. When they go around the legislative system to get a single judge to approve what they want, that's demanding. Like I said, when they stop using terms like homophobic and bigot to describe someone that thinks differently than they do about what they are, I'll ignore. As long as they say look at me, I'll say crawl back under your rock or in the closet.