- Joined
- Mar 5, 2008
- Messages
- 112,990
- Reaction score
- 60,552
- Location
- Sarasota Fla
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
The most common argument would be that it is both normal and natural:
i. Normal because it is found and accepted by many cultures in remote regions, around the world, and;
ii. Natural because it is found in many different species in nature.
Neither i nor ii imply that it is moral, however. Implying that either i or ii justifies homosexuality as an act is a large fallacy.
The most common argument would be that it is both normal and natural:
i. Normal because it is found and accepted by many cultures in remote regions, around the world, and;
ii. Natural because it is found in many different species in nature.
Neither i nor ii imply that it is moral, however. Implying that either i or ii justifies homosexuality as an act is a large fallacy.
The most common argument would be that it is both normal and natural:
i. Normal because it is found and accepted by many cultures in remote regions, around the world, and;
ii. Natural because it is found in many different species in nature.
Neither i nor ii imply that it is moral, however. Implying that either i or ii justifies homosexuality as an act is a large fallacy.
I don't care if it's normal or natural because they aren't hurting anybody.I am not asking about morality. That is a different question and one that requires a value judgement. Normal and natural should be questions that can be answered objectively.
Did this about normal a few years ago, and decided it was time to try again. Was a fun and interesting thread at the time, so hopefully this will be as well. Two simple questions. Is Homosexuality "normal", and is homosexuality "natural"? If you would, please include your reasoning.
Poll will allow multiple choices, pick a choice for the "normal" question and for the "natural" question. Poll will be up in a couple minutes.
I am not asking about morality. That is a different question and one that requires a value judgement. Normal and natural should be questions that can be answered objectively.
The normal and natural arguments typically arise in response to anti-SSM arguments that homosexuality is immoral because it is unnatural/non-normal. Nobody thinks that something being natural justifies its existence.
All that matters is does homosexuality cause harm and that's a question that has long since been answered. No It does not.
Did this about normal a few years ago, and decided it was time to try again. Was a fun and interesting thread at the time, so hopefully this will be as well. Two simple questions. Is Homosexuality "normal", and is homosexuality "natural"? If you would, please include your reasoning.
Poll will allow multiple choices, pick a choice for the "normal" question and for the "natural" question. Poll will be up in a couple minutes.
The disproportionate share of homosexuals among pedophiles, disproportionate rate of a wide-range of diseases transmitted and held by homosexual men,
Source?disproportionate deviant and violent sexual fantasies?
Source?The uncomfortable fact is that it is positively linked with a large number of social pathologies, and the statistics are too emphatic to ignore.
How are homosexuals effecting Society at large? How does a consensual adult relationship effect anybody but the parties involved in that relationship. You are trying to blame homosexuals for things that happen to all sexes and all orientations. And some of your claims are not even supported by evidence in the first place. STD are a result of unprotected sex, they are not a manifestation of immoral character. there have been great and noble people whom have died from sexually transmitted diseases - proof that sickness and a lapse in judgment does not a bad person make.When supposed "private matters" effect society at large then surely it is a matter of public morality.
Homosexuality is not a lifestyle it is a orientation. That fact that you think all homosexuals are identical to the point that you believe they all share the same lifestyle, beliefs, practices, and mannerism is a display of extreme ignorance.Homosexuality is a net-loss for society and its lifestyle,
To bad that is an unfounded belief. It's steeped in your bias.and the replication of such, is against the grounding features of civilisation and pose a threat to societal institutions.
It would be refreshing for someone to say "like me" for who I am and let my sexuality be a non issue. It gets really tiresome for the homosexual and heterosexual crowd to constantly say, "love me for being a ....sexual!"
Most people probably don't care as much about your orientation, as your quality of character. As for the poll, it's natural for people to practice their instinctual choice, regardless of how it's labeled.
Alright. I was just pointing out that recognising that homosexuality is 'normal' or 'natural' is not a step towards accepting it, but even a step back from that, considering it is 'normal' in many cultures we otherwise find repugnant morally, and natural only in that it is practiced in the wild
The disproportionate share of homosexuals among pedophiles,
Did this about normal a few years ago, and decided it was time to try again. Was a fun and interesting thread at the time, so hopefully this will be as well. Two simple questions. Is Homosexuality "normal", and is homosexuality "natural"? If you would, please include your reasoning.
Poll will allow multiple choices, pick a choice for the "normal" question and for the "natural" question. Poll will be up in a couple minutes.
Being a homosexual does not make one a pedophile.
And contracting a disease does not make one immoral. you're whole premise of morality is ridiculous. Are paramedics, heterosexuals, doctors, and nurses who contract Hiv immoral?
Source?
To bad that is an unfounded belief. It's steeped in your bias.
depends on what definitions you use
it happens and exists in nature, so i would call it natural, but I would not call it "normal" due to it only being found a small percentage of people ( it's not the "usual or average state of being")
I claimed it makes one more likely to be a pedophile. Source: The proportions of heterosexual and homos... [J Sex Marital Ther. 1992] - PubMed - NCBI
Spreading a disease that is incurable is immoral. Yes, anyone who engages in sexual activities knowing they have an incurable disease is damn immoral in my opinion. Of course maybe widespread disease doesn't concern you, I don't know.
Sexually Transmitted Diseases in Men Who Have Sex With Men
STI infection rates among gay men reach 'crisis' levels - Health News - Health & Families - The Independent
Modelling the impact of HIV disease on mortality in gay and bisexual men.
"In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."
Early Onset and Deviant Sexuality in Child Molesters
"Of our total sample, 29% reported having deviant fantasies prior to age 20, and this was most pronounced (41.1%) among those who molested the sons of other people". I advise you to read the whole thing, though.
I've posted the sources. Did you think I'd make claims without sources ?
You're an apologist for sexual deviancy with enormous costs on society, both on the taxpayer, ethical conscious and moral fabric.
We would say in France Il ne faut pas se fier aux apparences. I'm not sure of your intentions, but to place a niche of individual interests above the common good is treason.
Look your new here. You're not dealing with a bunch dumbs dumbs, you might want to up your game.
But by your standards we view these countries as "repugnant"?
The problem here Grip and the reason there is so much noise is because of of the people who don't think this way and the efforts that make at limiting the freedoms of the people who have a different orientation then them. It's like being tired of hearing people insist on an end to spousal abuse. It is no less just a cause or less worthy of attention because you "think" it shouldn't happen
Since your post is handy I will use it: the occurs in nature argument has a problem. We know that homosexual behavior occurs in nature, but to the best of my knowledge, we have no way to know if any animals other than humans are actually homosexual. This does not mean that homosexuality is not natural, but saying some animals exhibit the behavior is not the same thing as homosexuality the orientation.
The disproportionate share of homosexuals among pedophiles, disproportionate rate of a wide-range of diseases transmitted and held by homosexual men, disproportionate deviant and violent sexual fantasies? The uncomfortable fact is that it is positively linked with a large number of social pathologies, and the statistics are too emphatic to ignore..
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?