So, does this mean that you will no longer be presenting the the natural/unnatural argument?
As long as people are claiming it is....I'll argue it. :shrug:
There is no reasonable reason that homosexuality exists in humans. It's a fetish. That doesn't mean, in and of itself, anything though. We do plenty of unnatural things that are completely accepted.
Which side do YOU think is the side that brings this up most often. It ain't MY side... it's YOURS.
There you go again. Define unnatural.
There is no evidence to suggest we developed homosexuality to serve any real purpose.
Other than, you know, that L word.
Love? Define that.
You can't, that's the point.
If you allow heterosexual marriage on the basis of love, why can't you allow homosexual marriage?
Nobody can define it, and nobody can tell another person whether they are in love or not.
There is no evidence to suggest we developed homosexuality to serve any real purpose.
There's no evidence that heterosexuality serves a real purpose either.
And no-one has to care.
Dude, really?
Homosexuality doesn't exist in great enough numbers in our species to do anything at all....much less anything beneficial.
And I pointed out that you are talking about heterosexuality vs homosexuality, not sex that involves a penis and a vagina vs all other types of sex. There is a difference between sexual orientation and types of sex.
Everyone could be born bisexual, and just fall into one or the other category because of the way they are raised (I don't believe this, but it is possible and would fit into some of the arguments you have made concerning homosexuality). A person could, at birth, have the ability to be sexually attracted to either sex/gender.
And I provided you with two possibilities for why we could have homosexuality. Just because you choose to ignore them, does not make them any less valid. If you wish to discuss why they wouldn't apply, that would be better.
I don't think it's natural either, but to be honest...whether it is or isn't is not a deciding factor on whether or not we'll make it legal. Basically, the nature of homosexuality is a moot point. So when someone says "it's natural....bonobo's do it"....it's irrelevant.
:roll:
Again, homosexuality doesn't occur in great enough numbers to have any effect on the human species. No purpose.
SB...that's the problem with all threads related to "homosexuality" or even abortion. Nobody has come forward with "any" viable reasons, which state what negative impacts or damages that homosexuality imposes on society as a whole.
The reason that they can't is simple. When all of the religious arguments are scraped away from any debate...the threads go completely flat.
And the real stickler is: They won't even say that their arguments are based on facts or opinions. There are rarely ever any postings that includes sources when claims or rebuttals are made.
ALL WE GET IS...their personal opinions, which are based on their personal belief systems, which is rarely, if ever, related to any scientific studies OR just everyday observable behaviors that are undeniable to society.
When we get opinions posted over and over, without any origin of facts used to voice opinions...it makes arguments...unarguable.
Many arguments like "Natural or Unnatural" derails important questions such as "How is homosexuality wrong? Even the word "unnatural" doesn't define "right or wrong". It simply means "Inconsistent with an individual pattern or custom or deviating from a behavioral or social norm."
"Natural law theory" is a label that has been applied to theories of ethics, theories of politics, theories of civil law, and theories of religious morality.
So don't expect any concrete arguments in any forum related to this topic by those who can only voice personal opinions.
THANKS for once again asking your question above. It has been asked over and over...without any results.
"Purpose" has nothing to do with the definition of natural. There is absolutely zero evidence that anything on Earth has purpose. The idea of "purpose" is a purely philosophical or religious one and it is not involved in any accepted definition of natural.There is no evidence to suggest we developed homosexuality to serve any real purpose.
It's my side...not me.
There is no evidence to suggest we developed homosexuality to serve any real purpose.
There is absolutely zero evidence that anything on Earth has purpose. The idea of "purpose" is a purely philosophical or religious one and it is not involved in any accepted definition of natural.
That does not suggest purpose, that merely suggests evolution and function. Purpose requires intent and intent is not apparent in nature.What about ecologic function... without which a species goes extinct, moves or evolves.
What about ecologic function... without which a species goes extinct, moves or evolves.
There is no evidence to suggest we developed homosexuality to serve any real purpose.
How is the pursuit of happiness not a real purpose?
woohoo! voice of sanity from mac in a homosexuality thread! we should throw a party! :mrgreen:
Some people say the same about this little organ called the appendix.
It's my side...not me.
There is no evidence to suggest we developed homosexuality to serve any real purpose.
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?