Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?
You are not logged in.
Over here on Kashyyk, we wookies don't believe in sex for pleasure. We do it to reproduce.
This is like 3 pages back, but I wanted to point out that it's spelled Kashyyyk. Three y's. I'll edit in something relevant later.
edit: Just read 3 more pages. Nope, nothin' for me to cover.
Last edited by Chimi (Jun 7 2011 8:06:32 pm)
Guys. That was a joke. In no way is homosexuality and physics related. You guys thought I was serious? Lol. I'm not that stupid.
As far as I'm concerned, we all agreed about homosexuality on page six. Here is what we agreed upon (without religious standpoints)
TakoMan02 wrote:But you didn't answer the question. Saying sexuality doesn't matter at all in the advancement of the world is, in my opinion, not right.
I did answer the question. Not once did I state that it doesn't matter at all in the grand scheme of life. To repeat myself for the millionth time, heterosexuality is preferred from an evolutionary standpoint.
From a social perspective, sexuality has little to no relevance to your own quality of life. Depression and suicidal thoughts are almost always brought upon you by other people in your surroundings due to peer pressure to live like them and their inability to accept people who are different.
To summarize:
Evolutionary standpoint: Heterosexuality is preferred
Social standpoint: sexuality has no relevance to your own quality of life.
-
I completely agree with RPG when he says that homosexuals are not different people. They're exactly the same human, with a different taste of liking.
I have no disrespect for homosexuals as a person. I do not, however, agree with someone liking the same sex because an evolutionary standpoint would be more important then a social standpoint.
Last edited by Tako (Jun 7 2011 8:17:24 pm)
Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.
Offline
And, um, about the gravity . . . "I want to have sex with you but I'm floating away!"
Dude. Ropes.
And two-person straitjackets.
edit: Damnit, tako beat me by 1 second.
Last edited by Chimi (Jun 7 2011 8:19:05 pm)
To add my 2cents on homosexuality, there is plenty of evidence supporting what Mustang said--homosexuality IS selected for, because homosexuals can help raise babies.
The evolutionary argument being made is that an individual has to have children in order to "win" evolutionarily. This is not the case. Only the individual's genes have to be passed on, and that can be done through the individual's children or through the children of the individual's relatives, especially close relatives. This is a simple explanation for altruism: supporting others helps further the genes I share.
Here are some fun facts: less than 50% of men throughout history have ever had children. Think about that. As far as it goes having children, over half of all men throughout history are losers. There are a few reasons for that. For one, many men simply never marry or have children. For another, cuckolding is actually surprisingly common--that is, the wife has the child of another man without letting the husband know. The husband raises the child as his, thinking its his--but actually his genes are never passed on.
Homosexuals can neatly dodge this problem by supporting their sisters. They don't have to expend resources chasing a partner (any knowledge about the gay sex scene indicates that homosexual companionship is easily obtained) and can instead help support their sister and her children. Furthermore, they know that the children are related to them--the sister is the child of the male's mother, so she shares his genes, and the children of the sister are unquestionably hers. As far as reproducing goes, evolutionarily, homosexuality is a reasonably safe bet.
Homosexuality stabilizes at low numbers because as the population of homosexuals increases relative to heterosexuals, it becomes easier for a heterosexual man to find a mate, turning the odds back in their favor.
Note that all this only applies to male homosexuality. Female homosexuality is a different ball of wax entirely.
Physics are related to homosexuality.
There are animals that are plating forward with no contact, mostly because there is to much pressure on them.
There are also animals that can split op, whit out any sex.
And there are animals that can make baby's by them self.
Only because they evolved that why to survive in there environment.
Physics are related to homosexuality.
There are animals that are plating forward with no contact, mostly because there is to much pressure on them.
There are also animals that can split op, whit out any sex.
And there are animals that can make baby's by them self.
Only because they evolved that why to survive in there environment.
This post seriously needs some links to legitimate sources. All I'm seeing is a bunch of baseless claims with no facts to back them up.
Pandapo wrote:Physics are related to homosexuality.
There are animals that are plating forward with no contact, mostly because there is to much pressure on them.
There are also animals that can split op, whit out any sex.
And there are animals that can make baby's by them self.
Only because they evolved that why to survive in there environment.This post seriously needs some links to legitimate sources. All I'm seeing is a bunch of baseless claims with no facts to back them up.
Why don't you try using google.
RPGMaster2000 wrote:Pandapo wrote:Physics are related to homosexuality.
There are animals that are plating forward with no contact, mostly because there is to much pressure on them.
There are also animals that can split op, whit out any sex.
And there are animals that can make baby's by them self.
Only because they evolved that why to survive in there environment.This post seriously needs some links to legitimate sources. All I'm seeing is a bunch of baseless claims with no facts to back them up.
Why don't you try using google.
Try saying that to your professor. If you're the one making claims, you're the one to back them up.
No u.
Offline
My dear TGT,
The only people who cite Freud as a source are those who know little about psychology as a science.
Id, ego and super-ego does exist. It's id that is our nature, while ego and super-ego allows us to think rationally and manipulate each other. It's not like neuroscience, it's simple and you can't really deny it. Read about Freuds view of id, ego and super-ego and you will understand.
A very well thought out post, thank you for your input.
I would have to disagree on the point that most people condemn homosexuality because it's in their nature to shun anything that doesn't contribute to the human race, that's giving them far too much credit. In most countries, homosexuality is looked down upon because of victims of religious conditioning and indoctrination who spread hate and lies in the name of their god. If you look at what's going on in America, this is a very heated topic that's still going on today.
Besides, who is to say that homosexuality stunts the human race in any way? Because we have yet to fully understand the nature of the multiple sexualities that exist, it's very arrogant to assume that homosexuality is detrimental to the growth of our race simply because they don't reproduce.
Humans id-aspect of the brain is like any other animals, the one that doesn't contribute to the pack will not be wanted. But our ego and super-ego allows us to accept these people. But if humans wouldn't have an ego or a super-ego, I believe homosexuals would have a much harder time than they are having right now. And of course religious indoctrination is one aspect why homosexuals are victims of hatred.
Homosexuality stunts mankinds reproduction. Reproduction is a huge part of nature, and homosexuality doesn't combine really well with reproduction, am I right? Now homosexuals aren't that many, but if they would, as I said in my previous comment (as an answer to someones believe that sexuality didn't mean anything for mankind) mankind would be extinguished if everyone was homosexual, and in my opinion, that's a huge reason to call homosexuality as unnatural.
TakoMan02 wrote:So, then how does sexuality relate to "laws of nature"?
Because it exists in nature.
... Yeah, that's about it, actually.
Because man + woman equals reproduction and reproduction is a process of nature. Man + man or woman + woman can't reproduce and that is unnatural.
Correct Tako, TGT is wrong. It is merely his opinion that nature disallows homosexuality, it is not actually a law. Nor a theory accepted by scientists for that matter. Considering how it exists, nature clearly allows it.
Again, nature has no intention, only existence.
Nature allows the sex-aspect of homosexuality, but nature wont let two homosexuals make children and that's what makes it unnatural in my opinion.
Most information I did say there, is what I know from my old physics and science book. And some things from National Geographic.
So if you what some links or information, than you need to Google it.
Homosexuality stunts mankinds reproduction. Reproduction is a huge part of nature, and homosexuality doesn't combine really well with reproduction, am I right? Now homosexuals aren't that many, but if they would, as I said in my previous comment (as an answer to someones believe that sexuality didn't mean anything for mankind) mankind would be extinguished if everyone was homosexual, and in my opinion, that's a huge reason to call homosexuality as unnatural.
Because man + woman equals reproduction and reproduction is a process of nature. Man + man or woman + woman can't reproduce and that is unnatural.
Nature allows the sex-aspect of homosexuality, but nature wont let two homosexuals make children and that's what makes it unnatural in my opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual … in_animals
Your definition of nature is flawed. Anything that is a product of nature is by definition natural. This isn't even a matter of debate and opinion since this just seems to boil down to an argument over semantics.
MIHB's post also brings up some excellent points regarding the evolutionary perks of homosexuality, I'm hoping that you didn't decide to ignore it?
So if you what some links or information, than you need to Google it.
That's just asinine, no one will ever take you seriously if you force other people to do your own research for you.
Physics are related to homosexuality.
Ctrl + F search for "Physics". No results found.
Physics and biology are two separate entities in science. It's useless to claim anything otherwise.
Id, ego and super-ego does exist. It's id that is our nature, while ego and super-ego allows us to think rationally and manipulate each other. It's not like neuroscience, it's simple and you can't really deny it. Read about Freuds view of id, ego and super-ego and you will understand.
Sweetie, I have a degree in psychology, you can't win this one.
Offline
Id, ego and super-ego does exist. It's id that is our nature, while ego and super-ego allows us to think rationally and manipulate each other. It's not like neuroscience, it's simple and you can't really deny it. Read about Freuds view of id, ego and super-ego and you will understand.
Sweetie, I have a degree in psychology, you can't win this one.
I have a doctorate in music, If I teamed sides with TGT you'd lose, no doubt.
I did know you would say that xd
Physics have an impact on nature, and everything that lives on the planet evolved so they can survive in the nature.
So if the nature doesn't give them the change to have physical contact to reproduce they will find a other way.
BEE wrote:Id, ego and super-ego does exist. It's id that is our nature, while ego and super-ego allows us to think rationally and manipulate each other. It's not like neuroscience, it's simple and you can't really deny it. Read about Freuds view of id, ego and super-ego and you will understand.
Sweetie, I have a degree in psychology, you can't win this one.
I have a doctorate in music, If I teamed sides with TGT you'd lose, no doubt.
For someone who supposedly has a doctorate you know surprisingly little about proper sourcing.
No u.
Offline
BEE wrote:Id, ego and super-ego does exist. It's id that is our nature, while ego and super-ego allows us to think rationally and manipulate each other. It's not like neuroscience, it's simple and you can't really deny it. Read about Freuds view of id, ego and super-ego and you will understand.
Sweetie, I have a degree in psychology, you can't win this one.
I have a doctorate in music, If I teamed sides with TGT you'd lose, no doubt.
You have a doctorate in music? That's the biggest load of b/s I've ever read.
What did you write your dissertation on?
Offline
Guys, I think he's just trolling you. >_>
Guys, I think he's just trolling you. >_>
He posted it here too: http://eeforumify.com/viewtopic.php?pid=131783#p131783
No u.
Offline
RPGMaster2000 wrote:Guys, I think he's just trolling you. >_>
He posted it here too: http://eeforumify.com/viewtopic.php?pid=131783#p131783
He is also known as "zeus" in the ShellShock Live forums. He got banned for excessive flaming and trolling.
[ Started around 1732848766.7481 - Generated in 0.160 seconds, 12 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.81 MiB (Peak: 2.07 MiB) ]