The Homosexual Dilemma

[MaryL]

Religion is moot. So is Homosexuality, future generations will find the truth from the propaganda.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

This is why when someone links to a partisan web site which filters someone else's work, you should always ask for the source material.

The hacks at the anti-gay web site lied and manufactured a mountain of bullshit to support their debunked claims and bogus pseudoscience.

ROFLMNAO! That is ADORABLE!

I just adore watching Leftist try to reason.

 

[80zephyr]

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.

Of course it does. The sex drive is natures way of prepeutuating

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.

Umm. No. Its foreplay.

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.

Whether I like it or not is irrelevant. You learn in third grade sex ed what sex is. Maybe you should have went to class.

Foreplay: erotic stimulation preceding sexual intercourse.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

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.

Having explained everything to you already, I understand doing it again would be fruitless. If you can't understand my answers, I cannot help you.

Mark

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There is no proof that Homosexuality isn't a sexual dysfunction, none. And so far, I am not seeing how homosexuals are in need of constitutional protection like blacks or women or left-handed people or Handicapped persons. It's stretch to make sexual dysfunction something that should be protected under the Constitution. I still am not buying this whole "gay rights" propaganda.

Whether you 'buy' it or not is irrelevant.

As a fact of Constitutional jurisprudence gay Americans are entitled to due process and equal protection of the law, they have the right to express themselves as individuals absent interference by the state, and they constitute a class of persons entitled to Constitutional protections, guaranteeing them the right to self-determination and personal liberty, as is the case with all Americans.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no proof that Homosexuality isn't a sexual dysfunction, none. And so far, I am not seeing how homosexuals are in need of constitutional protection like blacks or women or left-handed people or Handicapped persons. It's stretch to make sexual dysfunction something that should be protected under the Constitution. I still am not buying this whole "gay rights" propaganda.

Fallacy of derivative analogy. We are talking about marriage, not race, or sex, or handicaps or handedness. If you fight it immoral, OK. Not your business.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

There is no proof that Homosexuality isn't a sexual dysfunction, none. And so far, I am not seeing how homosexuals are in need of constitutional protection like blacks or women or left-handed people or Handicapped persons. It's stretch to make sexual dysfunction something that should be protected under the Constitution. I still am not buying this whole "gay rights" propaganda.

Homosexuality is a presentation of mental disorder, that it is sexual dysfunction is not even remotely debatable.

The Sexually abnormal crave sexual gratification outside of the human physiological standard... which defines the function of human sexuality.

There's nothing to protect, they're an insignificant minority which is driving hard for public policy in order to establish the means to increase their numbers into majority.

Now, what happens to a culture with a majority of homosexuals?

No one knows... because every culture that has ever accepted such, perished from the earth, shortly thereafter.

Because of that... it becomes obvious to all but the most pitifully foolish that at BEST: It's a BAD IDEA!

 

[MaryL]

Homosexuality is a...not a human right. How is Homosexuality deferent from any other sexual malfunction... It doesn't need protection under the constitution any more than does Female dryness, Erectile dysfunction or another sexual issue. Homosexuality is a made up cause with phony rights. Not buying it.

 

[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.

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'.

So, you really don't understand any of what I am saying? You are putting your words in my mouth. Maybe you shouldn't.

Mark

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

There is no proof that Homosexuality isn't a sexual dysfunction, none. And so far, I am not seeing how homosexuals are in need of constitutional protection like blacks or women or left-handed people or Handicapped persons. It's stretch to make sexual dysfunction something that should be protected under the Constitution. I still am not buying this whole "gay rights" propaganda.

Whether you 'buy' it or not is irrelevant.

As a fact of Constitutional jurisprudence gay Americans are entitled to due process and equal protection of the law, they have the right to express themselves as individuals absent interference by the state, and they constitute a class of persons entitled to Constitutional protections, guaranteeing them the right to self-determination and personal liberty, as is the case with all Americans.

And as a fact of reality, Homosexuals presently enjoy the full measure of due process and equal protection before the law.

And this without regard to the weeping and gnashing of Leftist tooth which claims otherwise.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Western Journalism" and the "Family Research Council" are propaganda organizations lying on behalf an immoral and irrational interpretation of the universe in which we live.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

"Western Journalism" and the "Family Research Council" are propaganda organizations lying on behalf an immoral and irrational interpretation of the universe in which we live.

ROFLMNAO!

Imagine the potential depth of a hypocrisy, wherein Leftist lament PROPAGANDA!

ROFLMNAO!

Now THAT is entertainment folks!

 

[MaryL]

A third grade sex education tells me, or common human sense tells us that people with perversions have mental issues, not sociological ones. men that expose themselves, Peeping toms, people with sexual fetishes don't get a special prerequisite. People that abuse animals, or rape don't get special rights, that's like homosexuals. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't hurting anyone, that is a matter of opinion. Excuse us, we just have a different opinion...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Ridicule lands back on the user, Where_r_my_Keys, for he knows he works for propaganda outfits motivated by confirmation bias that encourages their cognitive dissonance to lie as proven above.

 

[JakeStarkey]

False statement: "Homosexuality is a presentation of mental disorder, that it is sexual dysfunction is not even remotely debatable." Of course it is.

MaryL, whether you buy it or not is immaterial, as are Where r my keys' silly arguments.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"
A third grade sex education tells me, or common human sense tells us that people with perversions have mental issues, not sociological ones. men that expose themselves, Peeping toms, people with sexual fetishes don't get a special prerequisite. People that abuse animals, or rape don't get special rights, that's like homosexuals. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't hurting anyone, that is a matter of opinion. Excuse us, we just have a different opinion." Once again, false derivative analogy.

There is no homosexual dilemma except for the weak-headed.

:

 

[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?

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.

You said:

Your reasoning assumes that there can be one and only one valid purpose in sex

In the natural scheme o things, you are correct. Why do you think nature made it so pleasurable to have sex? Why do you think nature gave us our urges?

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.

Wrong. Nature does have a plan, just like it does for every other living creature on earth. Its called reproduction. And nature will make the sexual act so appealing that people will do it, every chance they get, in hopes of propagating the species. Nature "understands" that if you make something pleasurable, you'll partake in it. Just like when you get hungry, you'll eat. Can you imagine how much of a chore it would be to eat if you didn't get hungry? Same thing with sex. If it didn't feel good, who'd do it?

If you don't understand that nature built in the "fun" of sex to aid reproduction, I don't know what to tell you. And while humans don't have intercourse just to have babies, the built in "nature" does not know that and persists in making it "fun", no matter the reason or age.

Mark



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.

 

[80zephyr]

False statement: "Homosexuality is a presentation of mental disorder, that it is sexual dysfunction is not even remotely debatable." Of course it is.

MaryL, whether you buy it or not is immaterial, as are Where r my keys' silly arguments.

In the world of nature, it most assuredly is a dysfunction. Homosexuality does not lead to reproduction, which leads life to die out.

Of this, there can be no debate.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

Are you the same Coyote I've come to know and love?

umh....maybe?

Then you'll remember I have some close gay friends who I highly respect. You and I discussed them at length on other forums. It isn't gay people I have a problem with, it's the assholes.

Yet here you are- in every thread- complaining about all homosexuals.

Nope. Just the faggots.

F*ggot- N*gger- C*nt- K*ke

All words used by bigots in the same way for the same purpose.

And bigots always rationalize why its okay that they use any of these words.

But we all know why they use them- they use them to attempt to hurt others.

Sorta like the way you use bigot?

Mark

 

[JakeStarkey]

And there is no question that homosexuality is replicated in every generation. It is part of Nature and has never threatened the continuation of mankind.