Is being Gay wrong or unnatural?

[That's the Spirit]

Ok before all the hate comes in, I have ABSOLUTELY nothing against homosexuals, I am just asking for people's opinions.

You could argue that the point or aim of life is to reproduce and maintain your species. We can see this in practically all life forms, from viruses to Dogs. Therefore, homosexuality, being attracted to the same sex (thus not reproducing) could be argued to be unnatural and a flaw?

Please post your views but NO HATE.

I will reiterate I have NOTHING against gays, it is merely a question.

[Zachary G]

though the point or aim of life is to reproduce and maintain your species, it has been shown, through scientific research, that homosexuality occurs naturally among some species of animals other than humans, so therefore it isnt necessarily an unnatural thing. being gay, i am of the mindset that this lifestyle is not a choice, but biological thing.

[Elysium]

Homosexuality has been observed in other species (for example, look up the children's book And Tango Makes Three, about two male penguins adopting and caring for an abandoned egg). Also, what does reproduction have to do with it? If homosexuality were wrong because of the inability to reproduce, then any relationship with someone who's infertile for whatever reason would also be wrong. All considered, I think it's perfectly natural - after all, homosexuality exists in many species, but the human race is the only species to ever vilify it.

[That's the Spirit]

Thanks for your replies, good to see another view on it.

[Karkat]

The thing is, homosexuality isn't all that different from any other trait a person could have that makes them 'evolutionarily unsavory'- mental and physical illness, light skin, tall height, women with low body fat and small hip circumference (so most of the Asian race, even)- the list goes on. What they all have in common is that they're all kinda counterproductive to survival...

...To a primitive species that relies on reproduction and strong genetics for survival. We are a civilization that is advanced enough to make it not only possible to let the weaker links survive- but to let them live comfortably and prosper.

And I'm not super sciencey, so that's about as much as I can tell you, but yeah. Basically, you're relying on the human species revolving around primitive instinct as the basis of your argument, and well, we're kind of past that as a species.

[DeadEyes]

Homosexuality has been observed in other species (for example, look up the children's book And Tango Makes Three, about two male penguins adopting and caring for an abandoned egg). Also, what does reproduction have to do with it? If homosexuality were wrong because of the inability to reproduce, then any relationship with someone who's infertile for whatever reason would also be wrong. All considered, I think it's perfectly natural - after all, homosexuality exists in many species, but the human race is the only species to ever vilify it.

though the point or aim of life is to reproduce and maintain your species, it has been shown, through scientific research, that homosexuality occurs naturally among some species of animals other than humans, so therefore it isnt necessarily an unnatural thing. being gay, i am of the mindset that this lifestyle is not a choice, but biological thing.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[James Dean]

Unnatural? Well I guess it depends on what that person believes. If you believe that reproduction and having children is a big part of society, then yes homosexuality is unnatural. If you believe that reproducing for the most part doesn't affect everyone on the planet, and it's a persons choice to not have children, then no it's not unnatural. Many people choose not to have children. Is that considered unnatural?

Wrong? That's a political question and it varies depending on religion, country and what their views upon it are. Me being homosexual/bisexual myself, I didn't choose my sexuality and I can't help who I'm attracted to. I live in the United States and there is no law against it, actually there are laws to protect people of my minority from employment and discrimination.

[That's the Spirit]

Homosexuality has been observed in other species (for example, look up the children's book And Tango Makes Three, about two male penguins adopting and caring for an abandoned egg). Also, what does reproduction have to do with it? If homosexuality were wrong because of the inability to reproduce, then any relationship with someone who's infertile for whatever reason would also be wrong. All considered, I think it's perfectly natural - after all, homosexuality exists in many species, but the human race is the only species to ever vilify it.

Even so, this is very rare if we're comparing the numbers to the heterosexual penguins so it could still be argued it is a glitch, or bug in the system.

[Gigablue]

Unnatural? Maybe, depends on how you define natural. But honestly, who gives a fuck about being natural. Lots of things are unnatural, at least by some definitions, but that doesn't make them wrong. Also, if you define natural as that which occurs in nature, then homosexuality is obviously natural. Either way, I don't see the point in debating whether or not it's natural.

Wrong? I don't see how. It doesn't hurt anyone. We should base our ethics off of minimizing harm. Since homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone, I don't see any ethical problem with it.

[Bull]

though the point or aim of life is to reproduce and maintain your species, it has been shown, through scientific research, that homosexuality occurs naturally among some species of animals other than humans, so therefore it isnt necessarily an unnatural thing. being gay, i am of the mindset that this lifestyle is not a choice, but biological thing.

I agree 100%. Gay, straight, bi, trans, whatever, we are all God's children and we are what we are and that my friends is very natural! :)

[Elysium]

Even so, this is very rare if we're comparing the numbers to the heterosexual penguins so it could still be argued it is a glitch, or bug in the system.
Just because something is in the minority, doesn't make it unnatural. It's not wrong to be a religion other than Christian or to be a race other than white. Don't mistake the majority for normality.

[Bull]

Just because something is in the minority, doesn't make it unnatural. It's not wrong to be a religion other than Christian or to be a race other than white. Don't mistake the majority for normality.

Great and important point!!!

[CosmicNoodle]

Obviously it's not wrong or unnatural, anyone who think so is a close minded bigot.

[Remora]

It's unnatural, yes. "Natural" would be the fact we needed to reproduce, women with egg cells and men with sperm cells and whatever they do into creating babies

[Miserabilia]

In either case the title of this thread is completely unrelated to what you posted :)

Anyway, I don't really know. Nobody knows for sure, but that's okay. We know alot of things that "cause" homosexuality;
in either case, even if it's a fetish or a choice,
it doesn't matter.
Only a small percentage of the population is gay.
Evolutionairy speaking, as long as there are plenty of men there's no trouble even if a lot of them were gay. There'd be more trouble of more women were lesbians though.

Anyway back on track to answer OP; no, but I think y'all know that.
Anyone that thinks is wrong can think what they want, but it's just an opinion. Everyone that thinks it's unnatural is just illogical, because it occurs in nature.

[Semi_IronMan]

I do think it's a bit unnatural

[phuckphace]

"over 9001 species of animals do it too" is an appeal to nature, and really doesn't even fit in discussions about human behavior. yes, we are technically animals too, but the gulf between us and them is considerable enough to make this comparison meaningless. male chimpanzees sometimes violently attack each other, including ripping off their opponent's testicles or ripping their eyeballs out. does that mean humans should follow suit?

anyway, I prefer to ask "is it healthy/unhealthy?" instead of "is it right or wrong?" to that end, I believe that for whatever reason, homosexuality is correlated with a higher propensity for unhealthy and harmful lifestyle choices, hence the stigma it has historically held. homosexuals seem to function particularly poorly in sexually liberated societies that don't enforce checks on personal behavior.

[Catriona]

I suppose it could be argued that being gay is unnatural, because a man and a woman carry the chromosomes to create a child, but two men/women are incapable of reproducing on their own. Otherwise we'd be asexual.
However, I don't believe there is anything wrong with being gay, I am just saying this from a scientific point of view. If a man loves a man, why should we protest? Love is love.

[Vlerchan]

"over 9001 species of animals do it too" is an appeal to nature, and really doesn't even fit in discussions about human behavior.
I have no idea how you expect someone to demonstrate that something is natural without appealing to nature.

It's also not a discussion about human behaviour. It's a discussion about a phenomenon (homosexuality - a non-action). I consider this phenomenon amoral.

does that mean humans should follow suit?
Humans aren't choosing to follow anything when people happen to be homosexual.

I believe that for whatever reason, homosexuality is correlated with a higher propensity for unhealthy and harmful lifestyle choices, hence the stigma it has historically held.
Do you have empirical evidence that homosexuality has historically been correlated with a "higher propensity for unhealthy and harmful lifestyle choices"?

---

If I was also to suggest a reason why there's a stigma against homosexuality it would be that homosexual couples can't contribute to enlarging a family/nation/religion/whatever. I'll admit to having no evidence to support this.

I think the "unhealthy and harmful lifestyles" (I'm presuming non-monogamy, etc.) thatm might arise come as a result of homosexual relations being stigmatised and then homosexual being ostracised from mainstream sexual culture. This led to them establishing their own counter-culture which runs parallel to that of the mainstream sexual culture - one removed from the checks-and-balances of mainstream society. That is to say that Conservatives caused the problem that Conservatives are complaining about now. I'll admit to having no evidence to support this.

[phuckphace]

I have no idea how you expect someone to demonstrate that something is natural without appealing to nature.

I'm saying that merely because something is "natural" in the loosest animalistic sense doesn't mean it works in the context of complex human society.

It's also not a discussion about human behaviour. It's a discussion about a phenomenon (homosexuality - a non-action). I consider this phenomenon amoral.

I agree that the phenomenon itself is amoral. but since it influences human behavior in direct ways, you can't have a meaningful discussion about it without examining this angle.

Do you have empirical evidence that homosexuality has historically been correlated with a "higher propensity for unhealthy and harmful lifestyle choices"?

if by empirical you mean direct observable evidence, that's actually one of the precise reasons I chose to disavow any connection to the LGBT movement despite being gay myself. after having spent some time in that den of iniquity, I can say that the very high rates of drug abuse, sexual promiscuity and this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugchasing) are indicators of something fundamentally different about the homosexual psyche. they are primarily hedonists (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=210587) in their pursuits, and direct most of their attention inwardly to achieve those goals. in past times (when we had a WASP super-majority) intense social pressure to behave normally had the effect of negating most of these hedonistic tendencies. that's what I find so ironic about social liberalism: it's a cause based on a poisonous premise (individualism > community) and harmed the very people it was supposed to have helped.

If I was also to suggest a reason why there's a stigma against homosexuality it would be that homosexual couples can't contribute to enlarging a family/nation/religion/whatever. I'll admit to having no evidence to support this.

I'd argue that the stigma has a mostly empirical basis, i.e. that they were observing the same behavioral patterns that I am. hedonism is a net negative for societies because it is a drain on resources while hedonists don't contribute anything in return, and if you highly value the stability of the community you'd take steps to suppress it wherever it appeared.

That is to say that Conservatives caused the problem that Conservatives are complaining about now. I'll admit to having no evidence to support this.

the evidence actually supports the opposite: homosexuals functioned mostly normally in past societies that were strongly conservative. that's the secret for success: focus on societal well-being first, and when you do, individual well-being will follow (it never works in the reverse).

[soundtrack] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ihcLg2sEQc)

[Vlerchan]

I'm saying that merely because something is "natural" in the loosest animalistic sense doesn't mean it works in the context of complex human society.
I don't think people were trying to make this point is what I'm saying.

but since it influences human behavior in direct ways, you can't have a meaningful discussion about it without examining this angle.
I think people having sex with members of the same sex is amoral too.

if by empirical you mean direct observable evidence
I mean "studies".

I would prefer cross-cultural analysis-stuff because that would best demonstrate thet truth of your point.

I can say that the very high rates of drug abuse, sexual promiscuity and this are indicators of something fundamentally different about the homosexual psyche.
I think social pressures play a much more important role here than something innate to homosexuals in regards to the above.

Drug abuse:

Alcohol and drug use among some men who have sex with men (MSM) can be a reaction to homophobia, discrimination, or violence they experienced due to their sexual orientation and can contribute to other mental health problems.

Drug abuse is also more prevalent amongst transgender indiviuals than the average person. I'd imagine for the same reasons.

Sexual Promiscuity:
A "playboy gene" (http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics/playboy-gene-promiscuity-110613.htm) exists so you could actually judge whether this is true or not with actual science. I couldn't find any studies discussing the prevalence of the gene in homosexuals though unfortunately.

I also think this is an important quotation from PsychologyToday. Note the bolded especially.

I included the bottom part of the quotation to demonstrate that the author doesn't disagree with the bit I'm trying to discuss. Just think's the hypothesis is simplistic-in-general.

You seem to suggest that, generally, the primary motivation for such "promiscuity" has mainly to do with innate intense sexual drive, combined with a low extrinsic motivation for social acceptance or "honor."

[...]

As a clinical psychologist, I think of "drive" as a combination of both biological (endogenous or intrinsic) libidinal energy, intrapsychic structure (including complexes), and external (exogenous or extrinsic) motivation. Or what psychodynamic psychotherapists call primary and secondary gain. In other words, for me, what "drives" us sexually or otherwise is a mixture of nature and nurture, as well as familial, societal or cultural influences.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evil-deeds/201111/what-motivates-sexual-promiscuity

Do you think that homosexuals who are already rejected from society for their sexual habits are more or less motivated to seek social acceptance as far as the rest of their sexual habits go. I would imagine "less motivated".

Bugcatching:

Depression is more prevalent amongst homosexuals. I'd imagine that this (self-harm) is just an extension of that.

Do you have statistics documenting the prevalence of this among homosexuals anyway?

they are primarily hedonists in their pursuits, and direct most of their attention inwardly to achieve those goals.
I think teenagers are primarily hedonists in general. You said yourself in the thread that a non-hedonist attitude is a sign of "maturity".

I went and got average by sexual orientation anyway and here were the results:

Heterosexuals.
Sample size: 11
Average score: 75%

Homosexuals.
Sample size: 8
Average score: 75.625%

Bisexuals.
Sample size: 3
Average score 76.667%

It seems like homosexuals don't hold more hedonistic attitudes to any statistically significant extent in this sample.

I can provide an exact breakdown of results if you want.

---

I should also add that I think that the greater prevalence of harmful behaviour amongst homosexuals would be more indicative of a nihilistic attitude. I'm not bothered calculating any more statistics though. Maybe later or something.

that's what I find so ironic about social liberalism: it's a cause based on a poisonous premise (individualism > community) and harmed the very people it was supposed to have helped.
I'm just going to skip this unsubstantiated critique of liberalism.

Feel free to create another thread though. I'd actually be interested in discussing it considering the anti-individualist stance my views have taken the last few months.

I'd argue that the stigma has a mostly empirical basis, i.e. that they were observing the same behavioral patterns that I am.
I'm still hoping for that cross-cultural analysis-stuff I mentioned earlier.

homosexuals functioned mostly normally in past societies that were strongly conservative.
I'm saying that the homosexual lifestyle you disagree with developed in reaction to strongly conservative societies.

that's the secret for success: focus on societal well-being first, and when you do, individual well-being will follow (it never works in the reverse).
I largely agree with this. I just don't think you need to strip individuals of their freedoms to achieve societal well-being - just imbue them with a strong sense of responsibility.

[Soundtrack] (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAAzxdBkAdM)

[dirtyboxer55]

unnatural yes
wrong whos to say

[Elliott_hn]

it's a bit unnatural, but I don't think it wrong

[fairmaiden]

Of course it's not wrong/unnatural. Yes, some may argue that the aim of life is to reproduce; however there are plenty of straight couple who don't want to have kids. People can't help who they're attracted to, and it's perfectly fine to be gay :)

[Babs]

It's certainly not wrong. It hurts nobody.
As to whether or not it's natural, I think that is kind of irrelevant. I think it's natural. Besides, lots of things are unnatural, but that doesn't stop anyone from dyeing their hair, eating Oreos or going on the internet to debate about something that really shouldn't be much of a debate.

[Aajj333]

:metal:Technicly for a society needing to produce offspring yes it is a bad thing but since today we aren't gonna disappear if a few people don't have kids it's perfectly fine

[DeadEyes]

Everyone that thinks it's unnatural is just illogical, because it occurs in nature.

This, period.

[Arkansasguy]

Ok before all the hate comes in, I have ABSOLUTELY nothing against homosexuals, I am just asking for people's opinions.

You could argue that the point or aim of life is to reproduce and maintain your species. We can see this in practically all life forms, from viruses to Dogs. Therefore, homosexuality, being attracted to the same sex (thus not reproducing) could be argued to be unnatural and a flaw?

Please post your views but NO HATE.

I will reiterate I have NOTHING against gays, it is merely a question.

Engaging in homosexual acts is contrary to the natural end of human sexuality and is thus wrong.

[amgb]

In my opinion, being gay is neither wrong nor unnatural. There are now different sexualities in this world and I reckon everyone needs to be accepting of that, and if you put yourself in the gay persons shoes, considering the fact that person knows there are so many other gay people out there, being gay would most likely feel natural to them : )

[the main man]

Some people may argue its wrong but as far as natural goes, multiple spices besides humans partake in homosexuallity.

[Uranus]

I feel being gay/lesbian/ is perfectly normal and acceptable. Yes, we do need heterosexuals out there to keep the human race existing, but I believe that being gay, is fine. It's not everyone's job to expand the human race. Just like any other job. One person is assigned to *A* while the other, is assigned to *B*. I think that, if I, (Who's heterosexual) asks one (Being homosexual) whether being gay is right or wrong, they have the right to flip my question back one me and ask, is being straight right, or wrong. It's normal. If anyone is against gays, they deserve to be knocked out, because it is NOT wrong to be either gay, bi, lesbian, or straight.

[Dennis98]

Everything in life that isn't unnatural has some product . Product of studying are good marks , product of laziness are bad marks . Same is in nature , product of love between male and female is baby . But , what is the product of homosexual "love" ?!

[Vlerchan]

Everything in life that isn't unnatural has some product.
This is some pretty awful reasoning.

What's the produce of Friendship?

what is the product of homosexual "love" ?!
Both partners tend to derive pleasure from being in the others company.

So let's say happiness.

[TheGentleHerbivore]

Homosexuality can be seen in species other then humans.

There's a whole wiki page about it, I can't post the link as I have less than 5 posts. But if you Google "List of animals displaying homosexual behavior" it'll probably come up.

From dogs to penguins, giraffes, elephants, birds, and bears. Homosexual behavior and life partnerships (particularly among birds) exist.

What's the produce of Friendship?

Humans are social creatures, we'll go insane if kept alone. Friendship soothes that need and back in the cavemen days we needed the help of others to hunt etc.

Double posts merged. Please use the 'edit'/'multiquote' buttons next time. -Typhlosion

[Dennis98]

This is some pretty awful reasoning.

What's the produce of Friendship?


Having good people aroung you that are always ready to help you , understand and open to give advice anytime ...

Both partners tend to derive pleasure from being in the others company.

So let's say happiness.

Same is in heterosexual couple , pleasure . But that pleasure leads to growing love which results with a baby .. What is product of their pleasure ?! White faeces ?! AIDS ?! Haemorrhoids ?! Highest border of homosexual "love" is pleasure ...

[Vlerchan]

Having good people aroung you that are always ready to help you , understand and open to give advice anytime ...
This isn't something that friendship produces. This is just a reason to make friends.

I think TheGentleHerbivore offered a somewhat reasonable answer to that question regardless. I made the point because I wanted to see how abstract we could get with this produce.

Same is in heterosexual couple , pleasure.
So we agree that homosexual love produces something.

But that pleasure leads to growing love which results with a baby .. What is product of their pleasure ?! White faeces ?! AIDS ?! Haemorrhoids ?! Highest border of homosexual "love" is pleasure ...
Lol.

As long as we can agree that Homosexual love produces something and is thus natural by your specified criteria.

[Dennis98]

This isn't something that friendship produces. This is just a reason to make friends.

I think TheGentleHerbivore offered a somewhat reasonable answer to that question regardless. I made the point because I wanted to see how abstract we could get with this produce.


So we agree that homosexual love produces something.


Lol.

As long as we can agree that Homosexual love produces something and is thus natural by your specified criteria.

I don't agree it is natural , and you don't understand me well . All their products are AIDS , haemorroids ( in Gay case ) , white faeces ( in gay case ) and their so called "pleasure" .. Although I don't see pleasure in it . Everything that isn't by God and Holy books is unnatural ... Sodom and Gomorrah , best answer for you .

[Vlerchan]

I don't agree it is natural.
You said that if something produces something then it can be considered natural.

It seems like Homosexual love produces something.

[A]nd you don't understand me well.
The problem is I do. I can go through the below if you want though.

All their products are AIDS.
Not restricted to homosexual couples.

[H]aemorroids ( in Gay case )
Not restricted to homosexual couples.

white faeces ( in gay case )
Not restricted to homosexual couples.

and their so called "pleasure" .. Although I don't see pleasure in it.
As long as we can agree that people in homosexual releationships derive pleasure from each other's company.

You don't need to understand.

Everything that isn't by God and Holy books is unnatural ...
This makes no sense.

Sodom and Gomorrah , best answer for you .
The bible states nowhere that Sodom and Gomorrah were populated by any homosexuals.

[Dennis98]

You said that if something produces something then it can be considered natural.

It seems like Homosexual love produces something.


The problem is I do. I can go through the below if you want though.


Not restricted to homosexual couples.


Not restricted to homosexual couples.


Not restricted to homosexual couples.


As long as we can agree that people in homosexual releationships derive pleasure from each other's company.

You don't need to understand.


This makes no sense.


The bible states nowhere that Sodom and Gomorrah were populated by any homosexuals.

Read that Bible again... Anyway , I am too lazy to copy all text from wikipedia , because I don't have Bible in my home , but I have Quran , that says homosexuals exactly ... Anyway , "In light of the passage, the most common response to the question "What was the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?" is that it was homosexuality. That is how the term "sodomy" came to be used to refer to anal sex between two men, whether consensual or forced. Clearly, homosexuality was part of why God destroyed the two cities. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to perform homosexual gang rape on the two angels (who were disguised as men). At the same time, it is not biblical to say that homosexuality was the exclusive reason why God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were definitely not exclusive in terms of the sins in which they indulged."

That is only one small part about reason destroying that cities ...




Ezekiel 16:49-50 declares, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me..." The Hebrew word translated "detestable" refers to something that is morally disgusting and is the exact same word used in Leviticus 18:22 that refers to homosexuality as an "abomination." Similarly, Jude 7 declares, "...Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion." So, again, while homosexuality was not the only sin in which the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah indulged, it does appear to be the primary reason for the destruction of the cities.

And tell me , which minority group did spread AIDS during 80' ?! Which group destroyed familiar values based society ? What is pleasure or point being unnatural ?!


Those who attempt to explain away the biblical condemnations of homosexuality claim that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was inhospitality. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah were certainly being inhospitable. There is probably nothing more inhospitable than homosexual gang rape. But to say God completely destroyed two cities and all their inhabitants for being inhospitable clearly misses the point. While Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty of many other horrendous sins, homosexuality was the reason God poured fiery sulfur on the cities, completely destroying them and all of their inhabitants. To this day, the area where Sodom and Gomorrah were located remains a desolate wasteland. Sodom and Gomorrah serve as a powerful example of how God feels about sin in general, and homosexuality specifically.

You , me , anyone can't go against God and God's law ...

[Vlerchan]

Please note that I still don't care what god says about things.

Read that Bible again...
If you're so sure about this it shouldn't be difficult to quote the passage.

As far as I'm aware it's quite inconclusive what the problem was.

but I have Quran , that says homosexuals exactly
Sure. The Quran says it. I wonder where it got this information from though.

Do you think God decided to bring the issue up again for it to be re-recorded? That doesn't seem likely to me. Being omnisentient you'd imagine he'd get it correct the first time.

ekiel 16:49-50 declares, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me..." The Hebrew word translated "detestable" refers to something that is morally disgusting and is the exact same word used in Leviticus 18:22 that refers to homosexuality as an "abomination." Similarly, Jude 7 declares, "...Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion." So, again, while homosexuality was not the only sin in which the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah indulged, it does appear to be the primary reason for the destruction of the cities.
In all those quotations not once does it reference homosexuality directly.

Whoever you're quoting just draws that conclusion.

I'm not enough of a biblical scholar to argue back but it does seem like my claim that the bible states nowhere that the people there were homosexual still stands correct.

which minority group did spread AIDS during 80' ?!
I don't care. My argument was that homosexuals aren't the only people who can get aids.

So your point is invalid.

Which group destroyed familiar values based society ?
Lol. It was middle-class heterosexual liberals that campaigned for divorce - and the sexual revolution.

Do you seriously think homosexual people existing - and homosexual people have always existed - seriously caused family values to enter decline?

What is pleasure or point being unnatural.
You made this claim originally.

"Everything in life that isn't unnatural has some product."

Since homosexual love does have a product that means it isn't unnatural.

[Dennis98]

Please note that I still don't care what god says about things.


If you're so sure about this it shouldn't be difficult to quote the passage.

As far as I'm aware it's quite inconclusive what the problem was.


Sure. The Quran says it. I wonder where it got this information from though.

Do you think God decided to bring the issue up again for it to be re-recorded? That doesn't seem likely to me. Being omnisentient you'd imagine he'd get it correct the first time.


In all those quotations not once does it reference homosexuality directly.

Whoever you're quoting just draws that conclusion.

I'm not enough of a biblical scholar to argue back but it does seem like my claim that the bible states nowhere that the people there were homosexual still stands correct.


I don't care. My argument was that homosexuals aren't the only people who can get aids.

So your point is invalid.


Lol. It was middle-class heterosexual liberals that campaigned for divorce - and the sexual revolution.

Do you seriously think homosexual people existing - and homosexual people have always existed - seriously caused family values to enter decline?


You made this claim originally.

"Everything in life that isn't unnatural has some product."

Since homosexual love does have a product that means it isn't unnatural.

You're blind man , blind , if you even read this above .. Anyway : "Clearly, homosexuality was part of why God destroyed the two cities. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to perform homosexual gang rape on the two angels (who were disguised as men). Ezekiel 16:49-50 declares, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me..." The Hebrew word translated "detestable" refers to something that is morally disgusting and is the exact same word used in Leviticus 18:22 that refers to homosexuality as an "abomination." " And not to talk about homos in Islam , it is considered of one of biggest sins , deathly sin , it is considered immoral , unnatural , and unnormal .

And you still think that homosexuals weren't reason for destroying it and that they are cursed by any religion , and by God . And by the way , if you still think that homosexuality is natural , then , why don't they reproduce ?! Every natural , alive , no matter , plant , animal or human can reproduce normal , why they can't reproduce if they're natural ?! Some straight couples can't have kids , but I never heard for homosexual couple that succeed to make baby ... Nature tells us all .

Any normal , family oriented straight , no matter on class would be against them .. All that so called "liberal straight" were actually hiding homosexuals , and all liberals are same . Straight people can't live in front of Sodomy .


... If you think that you can go against God and Holy Book ( ANY ) then , go ahead ... My duty WAS to try stopping you , you don't listen to me , go ahead ... If you think that all intelligence and smart is inside you ,and you're "treasury" of intelligence and humanity and you're smarter than God , go ahead again ... You're lost case if you're theist , if you're not , then , why are you debating about religious stuff .. I think that we are too small and weak , as humans , if you think that you're smarter than God , nature , God's laws , Holly books , then MAY GOD HELP YOU..

[Vlerchan]

You're blind man , blind , if you even read this above ..
Mhmm..

"Clearly, homosexuality was part of why God destroyed the two cities. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to perform homosexual gang rape on the two angels (who were disguised as men). Ezekiel 16:49-50 declares, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me..." The Hebrew word translated "detestable" refers to something that is morally disgusting and is the exact same word used in Leviticus 18:22 that refers to homosexuality as an "abomination."
As long as we're clear that it doesn't state in the bible that homosexuality was the issue.

And you still think that homosexuals weren't reason for destroying it and that they are cursed by any religion , and by God .
I don't care either way. I don't see it as an argument against homosexuality regardless.

And by the way , if you still think that homosexuality is natural , then , why don't they reproduce ?!
Homosexual people can reproduce. Just not with each other.

Though I have no idea why them being able to reproduce or not has bearing on whether it is natural or not.

Every natural , alive , no matter , plant , animal or human can reproduce normal , why they can't reproduce if they're natural ?!
Old people can't reproduce. Are these not natural or not alive?

Any normal , family oriented straight , no matter on class would be against them ..
This is not the case in reality.

All that so called "liberal straight" were actually hiding homosexuals , and all liberals are same .
I'm tempted to enshrine this in my signature.

... If you think that you can go against God and Holy Book ( ANY ) then , go ahead ... My duty WAS to try stopping you , you don't listen to me , go ahead ... Ifyou think that all intelligence and smart is inside you and you're smarter than God , go ahead again ... You're lost case if you're theist , if you're not , then , why are you debating about religious stuff .. I think that we are too small and weak , as humans , if you think that
Ok. As long as you realise I don't see your appeals to god as actual arguments.

[Dennis98]

Mhmm..


As long as we're clear that it doesn't state in the bible that homosexuality was the issue.


I don't care either way. I don't see it as an argument against homosexuality regardless.


Homosexual people can reproduce. Just not with each other.

Though I have no idea why them being able to reproduce or not has bearing on whether it is natural or not.


Old people can't reproduce. Are these not natural or not alive?


This is not the case in reality.


I'm tempted to enshrine this in my signature.


Ok. As long as you realise I don't see your appeals to god as actual arguments.

I use religious arguments all the time , but you think that you're smarter ... Go ahead then , go ahead . About straight and homosexuals in reality , come here in Balkan , come in Middle East , especially territory of ISIS or Saudi Arabia , Russia , North Korea , you just use examples from West , West is only part of World .. And , again , I had chance to attend to one speech in Mosque few days ago .. One of religious leaders was talking about this , as I said , it is immoral , unnatural and deathly sin , and Hell is their next location after the death . I think that this is enough , even for mentally retarded person to understand that homosexuality is forbidden by God and Religion .. I said for homosexuals like couple , I never heard for their reproduction ... It says to us that is only heterosexuality natural , you need female for reproduction ...
I said also that there are cases of infertility in humans , about old people , nature and God designed everything perfectly .

[Vlerchan]

I use religious arguments all the time , but you think that you're smarter ...
No. I just prefer to use evidence and logical reasoning to support my claims.

Go ahead then , go ahead . About straight and homosexuals in reality , come here in Balkan , come in Middle East , especially territory of ISIS or Saudi Arabia , Russia , North Korea
The preference I hold for using evidence and logical reasoning holds all across the world.

.. And , again , I had chance to attend to one speech in Mosque few days ago .. One of religious leaders was talking about this , as I said , it is immoral , unnatural and deathly sin , and Hell is their next location after the death . I think that this is enough , even for mentally retarded person to understand that homosexuality is forbidden by God and Religion ..
Ok. Please re-read my previous disclaimer about my acceptance policy as far as appeals to god are concerned.

I said for homosexuals like couple , I never heard for their reproduction ... It says to us that is only heterosexuality natural , you need female for reproduction ...
You said homosexuals can't reproduce. This is incorrect because homosexuals can reproduce.

I agree that homosexual couple's can not reproduce with each other. But I've never denied thus.

I said also that there are cases of infertility in humans , about old people [...] natural
Ok. I presume we agree then that being able to produce has no bearing on whether you are natural or not.

nature and God designed everything perfectly .
This this include homosexuals?

Or did god make a slip up?

[Dennis98]

No. I just prefer to use evidence and logical reasoning to support my claims.


The preference I hold for using evidence and logical reasoning holds all across the world.


Ok. Please re-read my previous disclaimer about my acceptance policy as far as appeals to god are concerned.


You said homosexuals can't reproduce. This is incorrect because homosexuals can reproduce.

I agree that homosexual couple's can not reproduce with each other. But I've never denied thus.


Ok. I presume we agree then that being able to produce has no bearing on whether you are natural or not.


This this include homosexuals?

Or did god make a slip up?

Problem is when humans consider that they're God , same is in your case ... I hope your logic is gonna help you after you die , really ...

[Saint of Sinners]

Short answer: No it is not unnatural.

Long answer: Sin does not exist, it occurs in nature, normality is a human construct, the purpose of life is what we make of it etc etc.

[That's the Spirit]

Ok, nuff with the religion. THe bible totally contradicts itself on the topic of homosexuality.

39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.
Yet the bible also tells that homosexuality is wrong? Hmmmm.

Same goes for the Qur'an, it is no better.

[glasshearts]

If homesexuality is unnatural because of the lack of reproduction, isn't birth control unnatural? I mean its prohibiting reproduction.

[Lovelife090994]

Technically by fundamentalism anything not male and female and gender conformist is unnatural.

[jonosbro]

Yes.

[Miserabilia]

Yes.

why? A one word post is a little meager don't you think.

If homesexuality is unnatural because of the lack of reproduction, isn't birth control unnatural? I mean its prohibiting reproduction.

I see your point, but depending on your definition of natural/unnatural I think most people would aggree that birth controll is infact unatural.

Problem is when humans consider that they're God , same is in your case

Pretty sure he doesn't think he's god, because then he'd have to beleive in god or he'd think he didn't exist.

I hope your logic is gonna help you after you die , really ...

Really? That's just mean.

[Seth Green]

I will never understand the whole "unnatural" argument. Since when have humans based morals on what's "natural."

[Babs]

This thread is a barrel of laughs, thanks to one user.

All of my other opinions aside, I don't get why anyone gives a shit if someone is gay. Personal and religious beliefs aside, it's not your life. What happens between consenting adults isn't your business. Who gives a shit?

[NewZealand]

Ok before all the hate comes in, I have ABSOLUTELY nothing against homosexuals, I am just asking for people's opinions.

You could argue that the point or aim of life is to reproduce and maintain your species. We can see this in practically all life forms, from viruses to Dogs. Therefore, homosexuality, being attracted to the same sex (thus not reproducing) could be argued to be unnatural and a flaw?

Please post your views but NO HATE.

I will reiterate I have NOTHING against gays, it is merely a question.


Great post dude to start some conversation, though as I can say you don't believe what you are saying, as you still after that homosexuality is ok :)
Your poin on the aim of life being reproduction, and thus being the reason why homosexuality is wrong is flawed. Though reproduction is seen from viruses to dogs (as you said), there are different ways of reproduction that occurs in the natural world, much without intercourse. And on the other hand, much intercourse does not result in reproduction, many animals take part in homosexual sex, which obviously doesn't result in reproduction, and some animals, such as humans have intercourse without the intent to be reproduction, Dolphins are another example of this.
So if I were to say that homosexuality should be illegal, because it's sex does not result in an offspring, the same could be said about any pleasurable sex that does not produce an offspring, including masterbation.
:) all hypothetical I've course... Please don't illigalise sex :p

[Leprous]

Read that Bible again... Anyway , I am too lazy to copy all text from wikipedia , because I don't have Bible in my home , but I have Quran , that says homosexuals exactly ... Anyway , "In light of the passage, the most common response to the question "What was the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?" is that it was homosexuality. That is how the term "sodomy" came to be used to refer to anal sex between two men, whether consensual or forced. Clearly, homosexuality was part of why God destroyed the two cities. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to perform homosexual gang rape on the two angels (who were disguised as men). At the same time, it is not biblical to say that homosexuality was the exclusive reason why God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were definitely not exclusive in terms of the sins in which they indulged."

That is only one small part about reason destroying that cities ...




Ezekiel 16:49-50 declares, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me..." The Hebrew word translated "detestable" refers to something that is morally disgusting and is the exact same word used in Leviticus 18:22 that refers to homosexuality as an "abomination." Similarly, Jude 7 declares, "...Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion." So, again, while homosexuality was not the only sin in which the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah indulged, it does appear to be the primary reason for the destruction of the cities.

And tell me , which minority group did spread AIDS during 80' ?! Which group destroyed familiar values based society ? What is pleasure or point being unnatural ?!


Those who attempt to explain away the biblical condemnations of homosexuality claim that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was inhospitality. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah were certainly being inhospitable. There is probably nothing more inhospitable than homosexual gang rape. But to say God completely destroyed two cities and all their inhabitants for being inhospitable clearly misses the point. While Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty of many other horrendous sins, homosexuality was the reason God poured fiery sulfur on the cities, completely destroying them and all of their inhabitants. To this day, the area where Sodom and Gomorrah were located remains a desolate wasteland. Sodom and Gomorrah serve as a powerful example of how God feels about sin in general, and homosexuality specifically.

You , me , anyone can't go against God and God's law ...

Honestly, this post right above me. This is one of the reasons threads go out of control.

Why oh why do you have to hate on people who are different? You're on a forum with a large LGTB community and yet you hate on all of them like this. Yes I respect all religions, but not in this case. Forcing your beliefs on here on order to hate on gay people.

You make me sick. Why is it so hard to be nice to people who are different? Maybe you're not thinking about the fact you may hurt people by posting that. I bet you're not.

Maybe you should get out and look around, maybe you should realise that gay people are just as good as everyone else.

[Plane And Simple]

Last call in this thread to keep it RESPECTFUL towards members. If a single post's aim is to namecall someone from here on, action will be taken