The Homosexual Dilemma

[80zephyr]

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?

The standard exists, and always did. Since nature designed us that we need a male and a female for reproduction, that coupling was called marriage because human offspring need both parents to develop in a well rounded manner.

In essence, humans named reproduction "marriage" to lead to a stable family unit and society.

So, the standard does exist, and applies to everyone.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

"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.

We did name it, did we not? What nature "forced" together by having us have the urge to procreate.

Mark

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

More accurately, sex is about fun...

And in that ONE sentence... "THE PROBLEM" is forever defined.

Just as the concession is hereby duly noted and summarily accepted.

Crazy ironic huh?

(The reader should note that I said about 30 pages back that the Left needs to reject the stark consequences of natural law, as a means to claim themselves immune from the consequences of such... and that such was a consequence of the delusion intrinsic to their perverse form of human reasoning... and that evidence of such was in their need to set aside the responsibilities inherent in the "Right to Choose"... and that the idiocy at the center of the Right to Murder the most innocent of Human beings who are conceived as a direct result of their willful behavior stemmed from their "Right to Have Fun" which was the founded upon a profound sociopathy, common in every notorious mass murderer in human history. That in truth, Sex was a the result of the natural design of human physiology, wherein a sense of 'pleasure' was induced, to promote sex, as a means to propagate the species and that because such wrought such massive responsibilities, set within the nature of humanity itself, the lengthy gestation, the severity of such on the female's means to sustain herself due to such, the decades long period prior to maturity of the human being... that such required discipline and marriage as part and parcel of the natural laws that promoted such discipline and that religion was the typical purveyor of that discipline.)

Pretty cool huh?

 

[Skylar]

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.

Says you. And your personal opinion is essentially meaningless. As your standard was *my* perception of my survival, my perception is the only one that matters.

And I'm under no illusion that America is the lone exemption in the history of civilization, lasting eternally for the decades and centuries and epochs to come. All civilizations eventually collapse and virtually all already have. If they accept homosexuality or if they don't.

So much for your claims of causation.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why can't a man marry a cow?

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

Give it a rest. You lost faggot-hater, and they won.

Really.. faggot?

My God, you're such a miserable waste of humanity.

No, I'm honest...

 

[Skylar]

And in that ONE sentence... "THE PROBLEM" is forever defined.

Just as the concession is hereby duly noted and summarily accepted.

Your tell already? Well that was easy.

(The reader should note that I said about 30 pages back that the Left needs to reject the stark consequences of natural law, as a means to claim themselves immune from the consequences of such...

And I've said that you don't speak for nature, god, science or any of the other authorities you claim to speak for. You are using the 'Appeal to Authority' fallacy because you can't support your claims logically or rationally.

As your latest rout from the debate and abandonment of your every position demonstrates. If your claims had merit, you wouldn't need to keep abandoning them.

 

[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.

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.

You're right, I don't believe you, because you're an idiot, who signs his name as if anyone gives a fuck who you are or whether you live or die, which we don't.

And when I'm fucking my wife's ass or we are 69, believe me, that's still sex whether you like it or not.

 

[Skylar]

The standard exists, and always did.

Not in any state. No one is required to have kids or be able to have them.

And I noticed you straight up refuse to explain your reason why pop-pop and nana aren't 'illogical, abnormal' deviants when they have sex. After all.....its doesn't serve any 'plan of nature'.

Since nature designed us that we need a male and a female for reproduction, that coupling was called marriage because human offspring need both parents to develop in a well rounded manner.

Marriage isn't necessary for reproduction. Its useful in societies, as it helps keep things organized. But marriage is no more 'intrinsic' than one's favorite color. Or Queen's English. Both are just inventions for our convenience. And they are what we say they are.

In the case of marriage, in 36 of 50 states we say marriage includes men and men. And women and women. And those marriage as just as valid as a man and woman.

In essence, humans named reproduction "marriage" to lead to a stable family unit and society.

Its certainly useful for society, as it keeps things organized. But there are millions upon millions of exceptions to the 'reproductive rule' that still work as building blocks of society. Marriage can serve as a building block of society based on the family. Or a building block of society, based on two adults. Either works just fine.

You make the same blunder regarding marriage that you do sex: you fallaciously assume there can be one and only one valid purpose. And all others are 'illogical and abnormal'. But there can be many valid purposes, each logical and rational in their own right. Your claims make no more sense than to insist that the only 'logical and normal' reason to eat is to fuel the body.

What if you're really in the mood for a hamburger? Wouldn't that be a logical reason to eat one?

So, the standard does exist, and applies to everyone.

50 of 50 states say otherwise. That you disagree is gloriously irrelevant. As gays and lesbians get married anyway in 36 of 50 of those states.

 

[Syriusly]

Only combat veterans kill themselves more often than gay men. And gay men kill themselves 5 times as often as the general populous. Somebody isn't happy, wouldn't you say?

I'd kill myself if I chose to be gay.

Please.

Do.

I chose not to unlike you.

So you found yourself equally attracted to both men and women but chose only one? What did you do, flip a coin?

Why are lesbians so angry all the time? Even gay men try to keep away from you all, finding little in common. Perhaps women are so hormonal and bitchy, you shouldn't put two of them together like that. They need a man to calm them down. Just saying.

Why are homophobic bigots so angry all of the time?

Perhaps they are just frustrated by their failure in life and project their anger out on blaming homosexuals for their own inadequacies.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

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?

Understand what she is saying here folks.

It MUST be one way or the other... either nature's plan is to propagate at the expense of every other consideration or nature has no plan.

"It is Decidedly so"

Of course, Nature's design provides for balance, doesn't it?

In the sub-species, that balance is applied through limited sexual hormonal activity triggered by the end of winter, providing that the probability that the environment will promote a successful gestation and time for training the offspring to a point of individual viability.

Limiting sexual desire also promotes survival in that the 'fittest get it' rule provides for most of the animal world that periods of combat provide for the tests of 'who gets what twat', the best get the best and on down the line down to those who get none... which in the Human world is where ya find the homosexuals.

Yes... sadly, Cinemax has lied AGAIN! Despite the grand scheme of deceit, the homosexuals are not the hardbodied, symmetrically acute peaks of beauty that they're portrayed as on the TeeVee... .

They're the duds, left to hump each other's rhetorical leg in impotent displays of feckless, would-be dominance.

It's just one of nature's wonderful ways of culling from the herd, those who simply have nothing to offer the species... in terms of desirable traits.

Now... again, homosexuals exist and that's fine. But like The Clap, which also exists, its not something that a viable culture can promote and remain viable.

 

[Skylar]

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.

Not if you nut it isn't. That's unproductive sex. Just like say, masturbation. Or old people fucking.

With celebacy being just as 'illogical' and 'abnormal' per your own standards of 'nature's plan'.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Why can't a man marry a cow?

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

Give it a rest. You lost faggot-hater, and they won.

Really.. faggot?

My God, you're such a miserable waste of humanity.

No, I'm honest...

What ya are, is an imbecile.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Not if you nut it isn't. That's unproductive sex. Just like say, masturbation. Or old people fucking.

With celebacy being just as 'illogical' and 'abnormal' per your own standards of 'nature's plan'.

And there is ya have it folks... ROCK BOTTOM!

And aren't you lucky that you were here to witness it!

BACK TO IGNORE Nitwit!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Why do I ever think that these people are worthy of another chance?

They NEVER ARE... .

 

[Syriusly]

4. Football. Players seek fame not the old fashioned way, through athletic accomplishment, but by "coming out". Since when is being homosexual an accomplishment?.

Yeah- I can see how that would make you feel threatened..........

Really- I mean how petty are homophobes anyway?

Don't know. I never met one.

Just look in the mirror or ask your wife about how petty her homophobic bigot of a husband is.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why can't a man marry a cow?

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

Give it a rest. You lost faggot-hater, and they won.

Really.. faggot?

My God, you're such a miserable waste of humanity.

No, I'm honest...

What ya are, is an imbecile.

No dumbass, that's pure projection. You don't have the brains God gave a goat, but you sure think you do that's for sure.

 

[Syriusly]

Not if you nut it isn't. That's unproductive sex. Just like say, masturbation. Or old people fucking.

With celebacy being just as 'illogical' and 'abnormal' per your own standards of 'nature's plan'.

And there is ya have it folks... ROCK BOTTOM!

And aren't you lucky that you were here to witness it!

BACK TO IGNORE Nitwit!

I thought you had everyone on ignore- based upon the content of your posts.

 

[rcfieldz]

It's a sin...don't do it.

 

[Iceweasel]

Ok, let's go with your idea of gender....in this country, the government cannot discriminate based on gender. There. Your argument against same sex marriage shot down.

Wrong. You are talking about a RELATIONSHIP and pretending it's a person.

 

[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?

Understand what she is saying here folks.

It MUST be one way or the other... either nature's plan is to propagate at the expense of every other consideration or nature has no plan.

Obviously, it doesn't. Your ability to type the word 'must' doesn't create an actual dichotomy. Merely a false one.

Nature doesn't have a 'plan'. It has fucking. And there are a litany of reasons for it that are perfectly logical. The simplest being that it feels good. Its perfectly logical to do something that feels good. Even if your sex is unproductive.

Your reasoning assumes that there can be one and only one valid purpose in sex. And there's nothing that mandates such exclusivity. There can be all sorts of reasons. If you have sex to work on your abs or have sex to consummate your marriage, the ova and sperm doesn't give a shit.

Likewise, most men don't care how they nut. If its an amazing blow job, or unprotected vaginial sex....its the sensation they chase. Not your Appeal to Authority. And that's a perfectly valid, reasonable, logical and rational purpose.