Isn't Homosexuality Abnormal?

Status
Not open for further replies.
WileyCoyote said:
Look, dear uncle, if you are a homo wanting to come out of the closet, please feel free to do so in my thread...I have NOTHING against homos...nothing at all...I rejoice, as does Mother Nature, that you mistakes of nature don't procreate...
Click to expand...

homosexuals do procreate.

http://www.gayspermbank.com/

funny that you claim to have nothing against homosexuals yet call them 'abnormal mistakes of nature'.

you fail so hard.
 
WileyCoyote said:
So, when you're beaten and battered, you just leave? Oh, it was so much fun beating the hell out of you based upon logic...but seriously, I think you and I could be friends one day...:)
Click to expand...

you're the one who is ascribing human qualities to mother nature, basing your argument on a logical fallacy which i was so kind to point out, yet i'm getting beaten?

lol.

i decided to stay for a while longer to make sport of you, child.
 
WC, this is the only time I'm going to ask you to be a little bit more respectful, man. I closed the last thread because it dissolved into playground banter, just like this one is turning out to be. You can state your opinion, but do it in a more mature way. Stop letting yourself get trolled by UB. UB, stop trolling this guy.

Part of the reason stupid pointless bullshit like a persons sexuality is an issue in the first place is because even as individuals we can't discuss it without taking it and turning it into something personal.
 
UncleBuck said:
the funniest part is that he tells US to see things objectively when his whole argument is based on a subjective logical fallacy.

i-can-count-to-potato.jpg
Click to expand...

Offer scientific evidence based upon logical evolutionary theory, or admit defeat...I have done the former...you have basically done the latter...but there's still time for you to see things my way (the right way) and for us to be friends...:)
 
WileyCoyote said:
Offer scientific evidence based upon logical evolutionary theory, or admit defeat...I have done the former...you have basically done the latter...but there's still time for you to see things my way (the right way) and for us to be friends...:)
Click to expand...

logical fallacies are never the right way.

if you want some more information about how evolution works, here is a helpful link.

http://www.dafk.net/what/
 
Padawanbater2 said:
WC, this is the only time I'm going to ask you to be a little bit more respectful, man. I closed the last thread because it dissolved into playground banter, just like this one is turning out to be. You can state your opinion, but do it in a more mature way. Stop letting yourself get trolled by UB. UB, stop trolling this guy.

Part of the reason stupid pointless bullshit like a persons sexuality is an issue in the first place is because even as individuals we can't discuss it without taking it and turning it into something personal.
Click to expand...

I see your point. But I still believe that my post is based upon provable scientific theory. But I do admit that my take is debateable.

Please understand that I DO NOT HATE GAYS!!! I am just trying to spark debate...and yes I love to banter back and forth with my dear Uncle Buck...I consider him to be a friend...whether he reciprocates or not...but I will refrain if you wish...I do appreciate the HONEST UP FRONT response this time, without my thread disappearing with no explanation...
 
UncleBuck said:
you hold another false belief, unless you have some actuals science proving that mother nature has intentions and desires.
Click to expand...

Oh please dear uncle, you must realize that this world we live in didn't just appear without a process...designed or not, it was a logical process based upon the laws of science...
 
WileyCoyote said:
Oh please dear uncle, you must realize that this world we live in didn't just appear without a process...designed or not, it was a logical process based upon the laws of science...
Click to expand...

nothing you say will give mother nature intentions and desires. good night, baby einstein.
 
WileyCoyote said:
My point is that NATURAL SELECTION confirms that homosexuality is abnormal. You extreme left-wing people here don't see things as objectively as you profess...you're just as biased as conservative right-wing Christians...but you won't admit it...

Take your blinders off as see nature OBJECTIVELY...instead of through liberal glasses...
Click to expand...
Natural selection is the mechanism by which we see certain alleles increase or decrease in frequency within a given population. Considering that neither you or anyone else has demonstrated that homosexuality is controlled by genes directly or even only one way as there could be multiple paths to become gay, you have not confirmed anything.

One of the leading hypotheses is that hormonal interference during certain crucial fetal developmental periods may play a role in making a person gay. This could be completely under the control of the mother carrying the fetus and have absolutely nothing to do with the genotype of the child.
Another possibility is that genes that contribute to being gay are linked with other genes like impeccable fashion sense... okay bad joke. But seriously, if there are gay genes closely linked to other genes that give us certain desirable traits, then those genes will be passed down more often as a by-product, an accident of linkage as a recessive trait.
 
WileyCoyote said:
I see your point. But I still believe that my post is based upon provable scientific theory. But I do admit that my take is debateable.
Click to expand...
HIGHLY debatable. Considering you have merely proposed a hypothesis, one that is not based upon modern evolutionary theory and genetics but upon your obviously weak understanding of biological evolution. Why do birds-of-paradise evolve long tail feathers when it would seem the evolutionary cost to be so very high? Just because something doesn't seem to fit automatically with a simple and direct interpretation of natural selection does not mean that there isn't a valid explanation using evolutionary theory to explain it.
 
UncleBuck said:
but it doesn't have intentions and desires. so your argument is flawed before it gets its shoes on.
Click to expand...

Natural Selection doesn't drive everything though. What about natural genetic mutations? And since gays continue to thrive and survive perhaps natural selection is working just fine for them. It often results in a population that fits a certain niche. Couldn't this niche be man made?
 
You're arguing that something that exists naturally is wrong. You're placing morals on a natural state of being. How can a natural occurence be wrong? Your argument is over before it even begins. The fact that homosexuality still exists (even though you so badly want it to be gone you're mad at science for not getting rid of it) negates any points you have.
 
Pleasure and pairing are natural. History has tried many combos. You, Mr. Coyote have been preached at too much. We all have.

It's true, anti-social people are everywhere. For this I define it as "In your face." You don't have to be gay. Goths, Bikers, Evangelicals, Deadheads, Gang bangers, Counter-culture Hippies, Krishnas, etc. All can be anti-social. They want to rub it on us for the annoyance.

I decided long ago, what I hate is culture, not the "race", nor the inclination, not the deeds. The stupid, in your face, culture. There is no genetic basis for culture or Race. There is just people behaving. So, give up. There are no justifications for your attitude or the behavior.. If you detest gay culture, just say so. I do. No law against it. It's not the same at all as hating the people.
 
Doer said:
If you detest gay culture, just say so. I do. No law against it. It's not the same at all as hating the people.
Click to expand...

Why do you even care what two adults do in the privacy of their own home. I'll never get the "anti-gay" culture that is so prevalent here. Unless they're fucking each other in the ass on your couch, then why the fuck do you even care?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top