What is personal responsibility?

[Bobby Hogg]

Homosexuality occurrs throughout nature, so how do you argue nature did not intend it? Nature made a mistake?

 

[A.B.Normal]

Once again, you try to link two totally incompatible items to prove your point. Find another comparison, because what you describe is a male-female relationship...the way nature intended, and not the male-male, or female-female, relationship that is striving for validation and acceptance.

Oh yes and noone here would try to link male-male/female-female relationships to male-goat relationships.

.the way nature intended,

You mean the way the Religion dictates.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Homosexuality occurrs throughout nature, so how do you argue nature did not intend it? Nature made a mistake?

That's what people would like us to believe, but it just isn't so. Remember the 'gay' penguins? You know why you don't hear of them anymore? A small group of female penguins was introduced, and the 'gay' penguins were no more. You may continue to cling to the fantasy that homosexuality is normal behavior, though, if it makes you feel better.

And, yes. Nature makes mistakes. Take a look at your typical biological specimins in formaldehyde, and you'll find all kinds of genetic anomolies. Most of those don't make it to puberty, though.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

That's what people would like us to believe, but it just isn't so. Remember the 'gay' penguins? You know why you don't hear of them anymore? A small group of female penguins was introduced, and the 'gay' penguins were no more. You may continue to cling to the fantasy that homosexuality is normal behavior, though, if it makes you feel better.

And, yes. Nature makes mistakes. Take a look at your typical biological specimins in formaldehyde, and you'll find all kinds of genetic anomolies. Most of those don't make it to puberty, though.

Whatever gay penguins you speak of are not the only example of gay animals.

Additionally, throughout nature there are creatures which procreate asexually, or who are hermaphrodite, or who can conveniently switch their sex when the need arises. There are animals which masturbate, animals which rape etc.

Nature doesn't intend anything and nature does not make mistakes. Things just happen. No one is genetically perfect and we all possess genetic variations which will either kill us or have the potential to kill us.

It is up to us whether human beings accept homosexual relationships in society. Homosexuality is not going to disappear from the world, it never has throughout all of human history despite efforts to suppress it. So we have to do decide what harm two adults are really doing by enjoying a loving relationship and a bit of bumsex in the privacy of their own home.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Whatever gay penguins you speak of are not the only example of gay animals.

Additionally, throughout nature there are creatures which procreate asexually, or who are hermaphrodite, or who can conveniently switch their sex when the need arises. There are animals which masturbate, animals which rape etc.

Ahh...the dreaded problem with ascribing human tendencies to animals. It doesn't wash. Animals that do the things you describe were born that way...with two sets of organs...and change when the need to increase population occurs. As for animals that masturbate and animals that rape, I have my doubts, as my biology classes never discussed those types of behaviors outside of the abberation catagory. You do know what abberation means, right?

Nature doesn't intend anything and nature does not make mistakes. Things just happen. No one is genetically perfect and we all possess genetic variations which will either kill us or have the potential to kill us.

Never said perfection. That's just you trying to put words in my mouth to further your flawed argument.

It is up to us whether human beings accept homosexual relationships in society.

Acceptance is not what is being driven. Validation is the agenda. I refuse to validate a lifestyle choice that I, and nature, find abberrant.

Homosexuality is not going to disappear from the world, it never has throughout all of human history despite efforts to suppress it. So we have to do decide what harm two adults are really doing by enjoying a loving relationship and a bit of bumsex in the privacy of their own home.

Unless you've been living in a cave, you'll notice that they don't care to enjoy their loving relationship in the privacy of their own home. If they did, this wouldn't be an issue, now would it? They couldn't care less about acceptance. It's all about validation.

 

[A.B.Normal]

And, yes. Nature makes mistakes.

Like making humans one of the few species who have sex for other than reproductive impairitive.This alone seperates us from other species ,so why do you keep using other species sexual habits with regard to homosexuality to defend your your religious ideologies.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Like making humans one of the few species who have sex for other than reproductive impairitive.This alone seperates us from other species ,so why do you keep using other species sexual habits with regard to homosexuality to defend your your religious ideologies.

Who said anything about religion? Oops. I forgot. That's your other defense for abberrant behavior. I, for one, didn't use other species until it was brought up as an example. Go ahead and check...I'll wait. Until then, I'll leave religion out if you will.

 

[flavio]

Acceptance is not what is being driven. Validation is the agenda. I refuse to validate a lifestyle choice that I, and nature, find abberrant.

I find severely overweight women abberrant should we outlaw their marriages? Fact is it doesn't matter what you find abberrant. It is natural and they deserve the same rights as anyone else.

Unless you've been living in a cave, you'll notice that they don't care to enjoy their loving relationship in the privacy of their own home.

Neither do a lot of heterosexuals. You have no point.

 

[Gato_Solo]

I find severely overweight women abberrant should we outlaw their marriages? Fact is it doesn't matter what you find abberrant. It is natural and they deserve the same rights as anyone else.

Unfortunately, the majority of humans would be in disagreement with your argument, and in full agreement with mine, so who has less merit?

1. It is not natural.
2. They do deserve the same rights as anyone else...as long as what they doesn't force the rest of society to validate their behavior.

Neither do a lot of heterosexuals. You have no point.

Gee...Guess that thing about public decency only applies to homosexuals, right?

 

[A.B.Normal]

I, for one, didn't use other species until it was brought up as an example. Go ahead and check...I'll wait. Until then, I'll leave religion out if you will.

because what you describe is a male-female relationship...the way nature intended,

You try to use that fact that no other species do it so its unnatural ,line of illogic.If you can explain how Homosexuality between consenting adults is unnatural without using other species as an example I'm listening..

 

[Gato_Solo]

You try to use that fact that no other species do it so its unnatural ,line of illogic.If you can explain how Homosexuality between consenting adults is unnatural without using other species as an example I'm listening..

Any organism has an innate desire to procreate in order to continue their species. Humans exist to produce more humans. Basic biology...which you refuse to accept.

 

[A.B.Normal]

Any organism has an innate desire to procreate in order to continue their species. Humans exist to produce more humans. Basic biology...which you refuse to accept.

But Humans don't only have sex for the sole purpose of procreation,they also have it for recreation.If they only engaged in sex acts for procreation your point would be valid,but they don't so its not.Humans are one of the few if not the only species that does that , by our very sexual being we are unnatural(according to your defintion), so by your defintion using the procreation stance against homosexuality is ludicrous. .

 

[chcr]

Any organism has an innate desire to procreate in order to continue their species. Humans exist to produce more humans. Basic biology...which you refuse to accept.

Nice oversimplification but it's just a touch more complicated than that. For instance, you have the urge (one assumes) to masturbate from time to time which is counter-procreative. One also assumes you have used some manner of birth control at one time or another, also counter-procreative. I'm not arguing with your point, you understand. All species wish to procreate. Just pointing out that human sexual relations are more complicated than simple procreation.

 

[A.B.Normal]

Nice oversimplification but it's just a touch more complicated than that. For instance, you have the urge (one assumes) to masturbate from time to time which is counter-procreative. One also assumes you have used some manner of birth control at one time or another, also counter-procreative. I'm not arguing with your point, you understand. All species wish to procreate. Just pointing out that human sexual relations are more complicated than simple procreation.

^Smart man ^

 

[Gato_Solo]

But Humans don't only have sex for the sole purpose of procreation,they also have it for recreation.If they only engaged in sex acts for procreation your point would be valid,but they don't so its not.Humans are one of the few if not the only species that does that , by our very sexual being we are unnatural(according to your defintion), so by your defintion using the procreation stance against homosexuality is ludicrous. .

The reason why we have recreational sex is because we still have the desire to produce offspring, even though we may not have the desire to rear them. What you describe as ludicrous, I define as natural.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

Any organism has an innate desire to procreate in order to continue their species. Humans exist to produce more humans. Basic biology...which you refuse to accept.

Basic biology also dictates that people who are too weak to live, die. Fortunately, society has bucked that trend by caring for the sick and disabled.

 

[catocom]

Basic biology also dictates that people who are too weak to live, die. Fortunately, society has bucked that trend by caring for the sick and disabled.

They have?

 

[Bobby Hogg]

They have?

In theory.

 

[Gato_Solo]

By George, I think he's got it...

Now we come to the personal responsibility thing once more...

If we, as a species, make bad choices (nothing to do with homosexuality), are we not responsible for every aspect of those choices? We make bad choices on a daily basis as a species. Sometimes we correct those mistakes, and sometimes we put those decisions off until we can think of another way, but we still made a bad choice, so are we not responsible for the aftermath?

 

[catocom]

In theory.

I guess it depends or your definition of living.

"It's all relative"