inherit
90719
0
Sept 30, 2015 4:38:45 GMT -8
lparker
665
October 2006
lparker
|
Post by lparker on Sept 1, 2010 17:33:16 GMT -8
To me it's "wrong" because it's unnatural. I do resent having their issues pushed in my face all the time (it seems) through the various media. If it's what some people want to do, let them get on with it - but without all of the whingeing about "gay rights" and shoving their issues forward as if they were the biggest problem in the world - they're not - not by a long way. WHINING? You obviously know nothing, they are 'whining' because they don't have the same rights as straight people, hense why they are shoving their issues because they aren't being treated fairly. I personally find it a HUGE problem that people (not just homosexuals) are treated different not only by people but by the government because they are attracted to the same sex?! Like what?! I literally don't and can't understand that one bit
|
|
inherit
Desert Fox
121300
0
Oct 24, 2012 17:20:04 GMT -8
Dumezil
11,185
March 2008
jehte
|
Post by Dumezil on Sept 1, 2010 17:49:44 GMT -8
I think it is wrong considering science. My definition of "wrong" in this case is the opposite of the way things were meant to be scientifically. The species that preservere on earth are the ones that multiply quickly with other members with the ability to reproduce after a sexual act. Then again, I don't think homosexuality is as uncommon or unnatural as people think. Animals have sex with the same gender to show dominance. Thousands of years ago pretty much everybody engaged in homosexual acts. At least all the rulers did. I believe that whether they admit it or not pretty much everyone has looked at the body of someone of the same sex and may have had a flash of a feeling that they are uncomftorable with. I think being attracted to do intimate things with members of the same gender is not "wrong" as I defined it before but actually having feelings for them emotionally beyond friendship is "wrong".
It is very difficult to explain...
As for being wrong morally? Kinda, yeah, when you give into it and engage in sexual acts. But I don't got no beef with nobody. You cannot choose to be homosexual or straight.
|
|
inherit
128054
0
Sept 19, 2021 11:41:41 GMT -8
amaranthine
244
July 2008
lunasama
|
Post by amaranthine on Sept 1, 2010 18:05:49 GMT -8
There's nothing wrong with it. It's natural. Love doesn't care about gender, simple as that. People love and are attracted ot other people, and in some people love just doesn't care about gender. I know homosexuals, and I sorta am (I'm bi, so yea. half-way there sorta), so I find no problem with it at all.
|
|
clonetroopermatt
inherit
-4164296
0
May 17, 2024 19:56:25 GMT -8
clonetroopermatt
0
January 1970
GUEST
|
Post by clonetroopermatt on Sept 1, 2010 18:07:26 GMT -8
What's natural about gays having sex? If it was natural, they'd be straight.
|
|
inherit
128054
0
Sept 19, 2021 11:41:41 GMT -8
amaranthine
244
July 2008
lunasama
|
Post by amaranthine on Sept 1, 2010 18:09:13 GMT -8
What's natural about gays having sex? I'm not talking about the sex part, really. It's just natural really. You don't chose who you want, it just happens. It's not a choice, it's a part of you.
|
|
Former Member
inherit
guest@proboards.com
171777
0
May 17, 2024 19:56:25 GMT -8
Former Member
0
January 1970
Former Member
|
Post by Former Member on Sept 1, 2010 18:22:36 GMT -8
My ex girl friend was bi, now she's Lesbian. I don't care if you are gay, bi, or lesbian. I'll still be friends with ya, it's not the orientation I care about. There are several Gay, Bi, or lesb. people on here whom I am friends with.
|
|
inherit
1453
0
Nov 19, 2012 12:33:36 GMT -8
kasooi
▒█▐ Rawr ▌█▒
8,242
September 2001
kasooi
|
Post by kasooi on Sept 1, 2010 18:36:06 GMT -8
On a purely scientific basis it goes against natural selection and if humans were not so overpopulated it probably would not exist at all.
It's a quirk in the evolutionary process which was not eliminated because humans were smart enough to extend their lifespan enough to compensate for it.
It's no more different than diseases, people having flat feet, and those with lazy eyes. Its only stayed because people can live with it. But technically it is "wrong" if it was ever possible to evolve perfectly.
|
|
Former Member
inherit
guest@proboards.com
171777
0
May 17, 2024 19:56:25 GMT -8
Former Member
0
January 1970
Former Member
|
Post by Former Member on Sept 1, 2010 18:40:23 GMT -8
A 'perfect' world would be a boring world.
|
|
Darth Vader
Junior Member
Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers MUSHROOM MUSHROOM
Posts: 220
inherit
69594
0
Apr 16, 2012 12:53:09 GMT -8
Darth Vader
Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers MUSHROOM MUSHROOM
220
January 2006
benji
|
Post by Darth Vader on Sept 1, 2010 19:39:24 GMT -8
Well, if you aren't really involved in any type of religion that believes it is wrong, then it really isn't wrong. Unless you blame homosexuality for aids... but I'm not 100% sure that's too true. And even if it might be natural scientifically, heterosexuality is more natural.
|
|
Ninja Alice
Junior Member
Together, we dreamed a Dream for Us.
Posts: 288
inherit
121660
0
Sept 13, 2011 14:47:53 GMT -8
Ninja Alice
Together, we dreamed a Dream for Us.
288
March 2008
alicecullen
|
Post by Ninja Alice on Sept 1, 2010 20:01:20 GMT -8
Love is love no matter who you find it in. ;D I don't care about the scientific stuff, or anything like that. I don't think it's wrong. And I think, no one should be judged, before best judging yourself
|
|
inherit
28486
0
May 17, 2024 14:06:05 GMT -8
Artemis
20,776
August 2004
lray2
|
Post by Artemis on Sept 1, 2010 20:21:44 GMT -8
This is an honest question here, but I've never understood the 'it's not natural' argument - what is its significance? We as a species have evolved far past any other on this planet when it comes to expanding our knowledge, technological improvements and the like. There are so many things in our daily lives that are' unnatural,' so why is it that homosexuality is some exception? I'm genuinely curious - I know that when it comes to the basics for reproduction and human survival it goes against that, but due to our overpopulation I hardly think that's an issue. And besides that, like I said, why is that the single unnatural thing we're picking on? =S
|
|
inherit
53567
0
Jul 22, 2011 0:12:24 GMT -8
Division by Zero
1,171
August 2005
tms
|
Post by Division by Zero on Sept 1, 2010 20:37:58 GMT -8
I'm genuinely curious - I know that when it comes to the basics for reproduction and human survival it goes against that, but due to our overpopulation I hardly think that's an issue.An excellent observation. I have suggested something along similar lines in the previous Homosexuality related topics.
|
|
inherit
29252
0
Sept 6, 2012 15:46:49 GMT -8
Derek‽
28,655
August 2004
kajiaisu
|
Post by Derek‽ on Sept 1, 2010 21:04:05 GMT -8
It's no secret that I'm a proponent of genetic purity and natural human instinct. As such, I find homosexuality pointless. Not exactly wrong, just insignificant to human survival. Beyond sexual gratification, it has no purpose; it makes no contribution to the species, and is thus an undesirable genetic trait. People have countered this with the argument of population control, but that's merely a by-product, one that's obviously unintentional (I don't believe in a higher power guiding evolution, and our genes don't just change based on our observed population). Of course, this doesn't mean I believe gays should be stripped of rights straight people have. Finding homosexuality pointless and hating gays are two very different things. Animals have sex with the same gender to show dominance. This is true, but that's more akin to rape than a consensual homosexual relationship. I'm not saying consensual homosexuality doesn't happen in the animal kingdom, just that a fair portion of it--exercising dominance over a subordinate--is just rape.
|
|
inherit
53567
0
Jul 22, 2011 0:12:24 GMT -8
Division by Zero
1,171
August 2005
tms
|
Post by Division by Zero on Sept 1, 2010 21:21:41 GMT -8
It's no secret that I'm a proponent of genetic purity and natural human instinct. As such, I find homosexuality pointless. Not exactly wrong, just insignificant to human survival. Beyond sexual gratification, it has no purpose; it makes no contribution to the species, and is thus an undesirable genetic trait. There are Scientific studies that suggest that there is indeed evolutionary significance to having Homosexual individuals in the species population. People have countered this with the argument of population control, but that's merely a by-product, one that's obviously unintentional (I don't believe in a higher power guiding evolution, and our genes don't just change based on our observed population).Can you cite any Scientific papers that support this claim?
|
|
inherit
the hipster
46802
0
Jul 11, 2023 9:48:53 GMT -8
aether
We are the music makers; the dreamers of dreams.
11,940
June 2005
aether
|
Post by aether on Sept 1, 2010 21:25:23 GMT -8
Playing devil's advocate:
Gay couples do not procreate. So, homosexual partners are counter-productive to the continuation of their species. Which, from a survivalist stand-point, is "wrong".
|
|