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.
He also claims he's in his 20s.
Last edited by BillyP (Jun 8 2011 10:26:41 am)
You can have your doctorate in your 20s.
Though I would like to see his response to what his dissertation was on. If he's trolling, it will be funny.
Offline
Well In U.S.A homosexual Marriage is banned in a lot of states, which I think is unconstitutional. But I don't have a view, personally I think homosexuality is just like any other love and sexual body parts shouldn't determine who you love.
Sex isn't REALLY for pleasure, it's pleasurable because since we're complex beings we'd think that it's only for procreation and only have sex to have kids.
But our bodies know this so they put thousands of nerve endings in our genitals so we're pretty much tricked to have sex, and tricked to have babies. Our sex organs were only made to have babies. The pleasure is just a trap pretty much .
Edit: Also don't take The Green Troll serious, he's trolling... surprisingly (not).
Last edited by Vulcan (Jun 8 2011 12:12:04 pm)
@RPGmaster2000: Even if two homosexual individuals are a product of nature, they are not able to benefit to mankinds natural reproduction in a man/man or woman/woman relationship.
@BEE: Then tell me what is wrong in my statements.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4p8qxGbpOk[/youtube]
@RPGmaster2000: Even if two homosexual individuals are a product of nature, they are not able to benefit to mankinds natural reproduction in a man/man or woman/woman relationship.
If we're talking specifically about reproduction, then yes, that is correct. However, as MIHB's post pointed out very eloquently, there is much more to take in to consideration than just reproduction when it comes to the survival of the human race.
Agreed. Yes,Man And Man can NOT make a child,but if it makes them happy,so what,there are enough people to "Reproduct" .
Well, my brother once was really crazy and made his dog eat dog food off is... I think you know...
Well, my brother once was really crazy and made his dog eat dog food off is... I think you know...
What has that got to do with this topic?
It's called being horny when you get like that ^-^ It also comes under beastiality for sexually interacting with a animal..
But yeah that's pretty odd.. But loads of people do it for some strange reason, it's pretty common.Normally people use peanut-butter. O-o
Last edited by Echo! (Jun 12 2011 7:10:27 am)
God dammit I thought this topic was dead.
And TGT, I can't pass on my entire college degree to you through the internet. If you are truly interested, take psychology yourself.
Offline
<entire post snipped>
God dammit I thought this topic was dead.
And TGT, I can't pass on my entire college degree to you through the internet. If you are truly interested, take psychology yourself.
No, just tell me what I said about id, ego and super-ego that isn't correct. You do not need to write an essay. I've had a basic course in psychology, so everything isn't new to me.
Oh wow, this is a giant debate. Avoiding these topics is usually good since it avoids flame wars, but since this topic is open for debate...
Let's start with the basics. What are morals?
Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is a sense of behavioral conduct that differentiates intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are good (or right) and bad (or wrong). A moral code is a system of morality (for example, according to a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc.) and a moral is any one practice or teaching within a moral code.
Alright, so simply put, this is a method to choose, as a society, what is right and wrong. Now, why do we choose what's right and wrong? To prevent harm to oneself or to others. After all, anything else to be stated as a moral would be ridiculous, right? If something harms nobody whatsoever, then there's nothing wrong with it.
Now, this is where homosexuality comes in. I didn't read the whole thread but I do know someone mentioned that homosexuality is observed in animals as well. That is a fact. It is irrefutable.
So if animals are capable of acting in homosexual manners and there is no harm done by homosexuality, then there's no reason we should deem it immoral, correct? In fact, those who judge against it are harming homosexuals, which would in turn become immoral.
If you've followed my logic, which you should have... well, I've just proven that homosexuality can't be immoral and homophobia is immoral.
I think people should have the right to love who they want to love. It's not fair for the government or anyone else to intervene with peoples relationships. I'm not gay myself, nor will I ever be gay, but I think those who want to be gay should have the right to choose. I mean I have friends who are gay and they are really nice. Being gay doesn't make you weird or wrong. If that's what you want to be then you should be able to pursue your dream of having a same sex marriage.
I am 100% completely against you on that one, it is wrong, it's in the ten commandments.
Also i think people are getting side track between love and being gay.
But i do agree we should treat them like anybody else.
Last edited by UgotPwned (Jun 12 2011 9:15:13 pm)
Offline
Ten Commandments? Well, if you're going to take this from a religious standpoint, then obviously your ideas on homosexuality will be biased. Religion just fed you "homosexuality is wrong" and now you're spitting it back up.
Offline
BEE wrote:God dammit I thought this topic was dead.
And TGT, I can't pass on my entire college degree to you through the internet. If you are truly interested, take psychology yourself.
No, just tell me what I said about id, ego and super-ego that isn't correct. You do not need to write an essay. I've had a basic course in psychology, so everything isn't new to me.
Woah, he's had psych 101! Everybody put down your degrees and listen to this man
If you've followed my logic, which you should have... well, I've just proven that homosexuality can't be immoral and homophobia is immoral.
The issues are a little more complicated than that. For instance, what if not being homophobic hurts the people who would be homophobic? Its entirely possible that homosexuality doesn't hurt anybody, but that accepting homosexuality does. Human sexuality and social structure is complicated as hell, so I don't have any strong opinions about homosexuality being right or wrong, but I recognize there may be some basis to thinking that acceptance of homosexuality is destructive to the community.
Last edited by MIHB (Jun 12 2011 9:55:56 pm)
Zalgryth wrote:If you've followed my logic, which you should have... well, I've just proven that homosexuality can't be immoral and homophobia is immoral.
The issues are a little more complicated than that. For instance, what if not being homophobic hurts the people who would be homophobic? Its entirely possible that homosexuality doesn't hurt anybody, but that accepting homosexuality does. Human sexuality and social structure is complicated as hell, so I don't have any strong opinions about homosexuality being right or wrong, but I recognize there may be some basis to thinking that acceptance of homosexuality is destructive to the community.
Alright, so I did exaggerate a bit. I know very well my argument is far from flawless. I am still of the firm belief that homosexuality causes no harm. It's also been proven that humans are not an abnormal species for having homosexuality, though by definition homosexuality is abnormal.
I do have serious problems with the way society is structured. Why can't society be simple?
I can also guess as to why it has turned out to be considered immoral. The thought of homosexuality is repulsive, no? However, in the same way that loving the same sex is repulsive to us hetero people, the same can be said for homosexuals being repulsed by loving the opposite gender. So why are homosexuals the ones being put down for it? Because heterosexuals severely outnumber homosexuals. The most common opinion of same-sex affairs is a bad one.
But is it fair to hate on the few who, by nature, fall in love with the same gender? I think we need to overcome this as a society, much like we're working on eliminating sexism and racism, albeit not too well. Religion also had a big influence in giving a bad view of homosexuals (as well as women). Sorry to bring up religion, but this is a fact I'm sure we can all agree on.
Alright, so I did exaggerate a bit. I know very well my argument is far from flawless. I am still of the firm belief that homosexuality causes no harm. It's also been proven that humans are not an abnormal species for having homosexuality, though by definition homosexuality is abnormal.
Existence in nature does not demonstrate a lack of harm. Preying mantis females eat the heads of their mates, but most men of our species would think that to be harmful. As for whether or not homosexuality causes no harm, I don't really think it does, but I recognize that if it does cause harm, its tied up in the impact on social structure.
I do have serious problems with the way society is structured. Why can't society be simple?
Short answer: people are stupid and can be dangerously self-interested and short-sighted. Furthermore, moral considerations sometimes demand a more complex society. A simple society would not offer any welfare, instead allowing unsuccessful people to die. Is this a good thing? You might say that a simple society protects its weak, but that generally leads to greater complexity in the system and failings that allow the immoral to take advantage of the system.
I can also guess as to why it has turned out to be considered immoral. The thought of homosexuality is repulsive, no? However, in the same way that loving the same sex is repulsive to us hetero people, the same can be said for homosexuals being repulsed by loving the opposite gender. So why are homosexuals the ones being put down for it? Because heterosexuals severely outnumber homosexuals. The most common opinion of same-sex affairs is a bad one.
But is it fair to hate on the few who, by nature, fall in love with the same gender? I think we need to overcome this as a society, much like we're working on eliminating sexism and racism, albeit not too well. Religion also had a big influence in giving a bad view of homosexuals (as well as women). Sorry to bring up religion, but this is a fact I'm sure we can all agree on.
I don't personally feel repulsed in the slightest by homosexuality, but that does not stop me from recognizing that my personal feelings about homosexuality are independent from whether or not homosexuality is a good thing, and that my feelings should not be the basis for social policy with regards to homosexuality.
BTW, I'm an atheist, so don't bother with that. My views on social structure are not influenced by religious views. They are instead influenced by my background in economics and psychology.
Last edited by MIHB (Jun 12 2011 11:27:41 pm)
In this thread: Religious idiots and Americans.
Edit: inb4"same thing"
In this thread: Religious idiots and Americans.
Which one are you?
Ten Commandments? Well, if you're going to take this from a religious standpoint, then obviously your ideas on homosexuality will be biased. Religion just fed you "homosexuality is wrong" and now you're spitting it back up.
Offline
Toby wrote:In this thread: Religious idiots and Americans.
Which one are you?
The space :3
(also the one who feels superior by entering a thread and judging everyone within it )
MIHB wrote:Toby wrote:In this thread: Religious idiots and Americans.
Which one are you?
The space :3
(also the one who feels superior by entering a thread and judging everyone within it )
blasted admins gettin all uppity in threads
Okay, real response:
My 2 cents: In England, the people who are homophobic are generally the really old or the really young (8-12 years old kinda range). Neither of which I really tend to hang about with. I can really only think of two other people I know who think it's "wrong", one of which I'm about 80% sure IS gay and the other is just a bit of a knob. Even the religious people I know don't care.
I won't get started on my opinions on religion, but to be honest, who really cares what those people think? You can debate it all you want, but, if you hate, you're probably just an ****/nut/old/prepubescent person who most probably don't wanna affiliate themselves with anyway.
The "you see it in nature so it's natural" argument is a load of bs. How about this: Humans moving faster than the speed of sound, flying, using computers, medicine, bloody everything in today's age is freaking unnatural. The whole "natural means okay" notion is a ridiculous ploy for the child-minded who want to poke around in and dictate other people's business.
God, bloody people. :rolleyes:
[ Started around 1732849810.1609 - Generated in 0.117 seconds, 13 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.74 MiB (Peak: 1.99 MiB) ]