Gays get the bum wrap
- Thread starter MrBishop
- Start date
One last time, I'll point out where the hypocrisy comes together.
Paul said:
Then you said
That is hypocrisy. Have any belief you want & defend that belief to the bitter end. Just don't come with the almighty prattle that what you are doing is somehow better than "redneck".
The nazi reference was simple. A tenet of nazism was to impune the ideas of others ("assault someone elses ideas"). Because some don't think that hundreds (thousands?) of years of history should be so easily washed away you did just that. Not as an individual but as a collective (I became part of an organized assault).
Bish, my definition of conceive is impregnation. I should have been more clear & added 'without the use of science'. If there was a major catastrophe we wouldn't be able to use those methods so I improperly assumed that manipulation wouldn't be taken into consideration.
"Homosexuality is a biological error." Since homosexuals cannot impregnate each other (using their preferred sexual types) they cannot procreate. Without procreation, they die off. Nature doesn't much care if it's 2003 AD or 15000BC, the entire purpose of a species is to continue. So it is an error. The hardware has been miswired somewhere. Homosexuals are not an error. They are a product of a heterosexual union. An individual. They can choose to partake in an act that causes the female to become pregnant. That is a choice. So, now we've come full circle, is homosexuality a choice or an error in the the biological wiring?
One of the slippery slopes of gene management is the very option you presented. Once the wiring malfuntion is found, is it moral or ethical to change it? That is a question of profound meaning & discussion.
Paul said:
We-more than one, others-someone not you, organized assault-a group with one (or limited) bearings attacking another.
Then you said
That is hypocrisy. Have any belief you want & defend that belief to the bitter end. Just don't come with the almighty prattle that what you are doing is somehow better than "redneck".
The nazi reference was simple. A tenet of nazism was to impune the ideas of others ("assault someone elses ideas"). Because some don't think that hundreds (thousands?) of years of history should be so easily washed away you did just that. Not as an individual but as a collective (I became part of an organized assault).
Bish, my definition of conceive is impregnation. I should have been more clear & added 'without the use of science'. If there was a major catastrophe we wouldn't be able to use those methods so I improperly assumed that manipulation wouldn't be taken into consideration.
"Homosexuality is a biological error." Since homosexuals cannot impregnate each other (using their preferred sexual types) they cannot procreate. Without procreation, they die off. Nature doesn't much care if it's 2003 AD or 15000BC, the entire purpose of a species is to continue. So it is an error. The hardware has been miswired somewhere. Homosexuals are not an error. They are a product of a heterosexual union. An individual. They can choose to partake in an act that causes the female to become pregnant. That is a choice. So, now we've come full circle, is homosexuality a choice or an error in the the biological wiring?
One of the slippery slopes of gene management is the very option you presented. Once the wiring malfuntion is found, is it moral or ethical to change it? That is a question of profound meaning & discussion.
ris
New Member
Gonz said:
the difficulty i have with the procreation route is that it infers homosexuality is different from humanity, as if it were a species if its own. they cannot die off because even if they could precreate there is no evidence they would further the homosexual line - it certainly is not the case with heterosexual unions.
instead i think it is simply part of the myriad variety we find in humanity that is part of nature itself - those who are blind, deaf etc from birth.
nature offers us this variety, i think it better to include them as part of humanity than attempt to describe them as somehow less-human.
ris
New Member
depends on how you see the errors in nature. if nature is full of errors and variety then homosexuality is part of it and therefore humanity.
if part of nature is its variety then homosexuality comes as part and parcel of a normally varietal nature.
you could say that errors are normal so therefore not in fact errors.
if part of nature is its variety then homosexuality comes as part and parcel of a normally varietal nature.
you could say that errors are normal so therefore not in fact errors.
Biological errors happen quite often, we'll agree. When they are helpful in fulfilling a needed function, they thrive & eventually become normal. That cannot happen with homosexuaity by its very nature. The individual homosexual can flourish
& be a great human. Homosexuality, following "instincts" for same sex coupling, cannot thrive since by it's very nature, procreation is impossible.
& be a great human. Homosexuality, following "instincts" for same sex coupling, cannot thrive since by it's very nature, procreation is impossible.
MrBishop
Well-Known Member
OK Gonz...another wrench in your machine... Homosexuals, because of the way they are wired together, chose (unconsciously) to not be physically attracted to the opposite sex. This in no way prevents them from actually going through the motions and potentially concieving a child. Biologically, they can still reproduce, and thus continue their gene-pool.
Homosexuality, in and of itself, is not a bar to procreation and thus, not a bar to it's own continuance. In point of fact...homosexuality changes nothing except libido. This error is minor at best.
To give you a concrete example on how homosexuality will continue to flourish well into the 30th century... until about 10 years ago, homosexuals, in order to hide their sexual preferences married and had kids. They were still gay, but they chose to overcome their natural tendencies in order to fit in.
Now...should they choose to procreate, they can overcome their natural urges and actually have sex with the opposite gender (much like het.men in jail become gay for a period of their incarceration because of need).
Something to think on, non?
Homosexuality, in and of itself, is not a bar to procreation and thus, not a bar to it's own continuance. In point of fact...homosexuality changes nothing except libido. This error is minor at best.
To give you a concrete example on how homosexuality will continue to flourish well into the 30th century... until about 10 years ago, homosexuals, in order to hide their sexual preferences married and had kids. They were still gay, but they chose to overcome their natural tendencies in order to fit in.
Now...should they choose to procreate, they can overcome their natural urges and actually have sex with the opposite gender (much like het.men in jail become gay for a period of their incarceration because of need).
Something to think on, non?
paul_valaru
100% Pure Canadian Beef
Gonz, you are hopelessly self rightous, adn beyond any rationalization
you see hypocracy where there is none
I've wastd enought time on you, this is th point where I remeber the old saying:
"argueing over the internet is like the special olymipics....."
ciao
you see hypocracy where there is none
I've wastd enought time on you, this is th point where I remeber the old saying:
"argueing over the internet is like the special olymipics....."
ciao
You're soooo misunderstood....