How can homosexuality not be a perversion?

It's in plain sight that anti-homosexuals want to and are actively trying to stifle free speech.

 

If you are intolerant of homosexuals, you are a bigot, by definition.

I didn't call you that, but I will leave it for you to decide if you fit the description, not that you care.

 

I guess it depend on whether you consider streaming TV or not.

 

You can't fool mother nature.

 

Let me know when you can offer a valid counter argument, one that is on point.

 

That's extremely valid.

You simply can't refute it because it is simply not possible for homosexuals to procreate. Not one single time in history has a live baby human being emerged from an anus.

Not one single time in human history have two females attempted to procreate together and been successful. Not once in the entire history of humanity has that occurred

 

Lust is natural. Without it, we would not exist. Lust as a "Sin" is a religious thing, I'm not a Christian.

In the 300,000 years of homosapiens, monogamy is a recent development.

 

No one claims that it does. But also nothing stops a homosexual from engaging in heterosexual activity.

Yes they still are a homosexual. Willingness to engage in heterosexual or homosexual activity has nothing to do with what sexually attracts a person. I am heterosexual. Pay me enough money and I'l engage in homosexual activity, but I won't be sexually attracted to the man. Being a homosexual or a heterosexual relates to your sexuality, not what actions you are willing to engage in.

It's not a heterosexual activity either, but it produces children.

Sexual activity of any sort is healthy. It's aerobic, provides stress relief, and promotes closeness in those already close.

No not really. You are conflating correlation with causation. Risky behavior is the issue, of which both heterosexuals and homosexuals engage in. Before hand, yes, in western cultures more homosexuals engaged in risky behaviors, but the opposite is true in other cultures, such as the people of central Africa, where heterosexuals with AIDS are far more numerous than homosexuals. Both men and woman engage in risky behaviors, but men currently do so with greater frequency. By your logic, simply being a man is unhealthy

Again correlation/causation fallacy. Especially when the African heterosexual population is suffering from higher rates than the homosexual population. And I am not talking about something like the misreport in the UK where the raw numbers of heterosexuals were higher than the homosexuals, but still of smaller proportions.

This is again a risky behaviors symptom, not a homosexuality one, although the conflation us understandable, given past history of the overall homosexual community.

Which has nothing to do with what goals are accomplished, which was the question asked. Please don't move goal posts.

Where is your proof of that? I have already shown how different body parts and different activities can have multiple purposes and not necessarily have all of them fulfilled each time they are used or done. On what basis do you claim the sex is only for procreation?

Which has no impact on whether or not it is a perversion.

Which has no impact on incest activity between two individuals who cannot breed? Please tell me how the loss of genetic purity affects a woman with no womb having sex with her brother. You seem to have a serious problem with conflation.

Yeah it is.
https://www.fao.org/3/x3840e/x3840e06.htm

 

Freedom of speech does not include freedom from the consequences of what one says. Nobody stopped Kaepernick from kneeling during the anthem. They criticized him for doing it. Nobody on the the right or left interfered with his freedom of speech. If righties call for someone to be fired is that worse than leftie cancellations or the same thing? Answer, it is the same thing. The difference is in the perspective.

 

Exactly, but abstinence is not the absence of sexual attraction. I am a heterosexual man. I am attracted to women. Even if I spend 20 years being chaste and abstinent, my sexual attraction remains. Thus I remain a heterosexual man, despite not engaging in any heterosexual nor homosexual activity.

And the common use of "sexuality" today is about one's sexual attractions, not their sexual actions.

 

Yep, homosexuality is completely normal.

 

This is a false statement, but it comes from your lack of proper wording. Plenty of homosexuals procreate. They cannot procreate with someone of their same sex, which is indeed their preferred sexual partner, the one that sexually attracts them. For that matter procreation does not require sex. Sure we have a lot of sophisticated methods to do it nowadays, but a turkey baster still works fine. But procreate those homosexual indeed do.

The problem is that you are trying to conflate who a person is sexually attracted to with their ability to procreate. One does not require the other in either direction. Yes heterosexual activity (setting aside medical interventions) is what is necessary for procreation, but procreation is not necessary for any kind of sex. Sexual attraction to the one with whom you are engaging in heterosexual activity for the purposes of procreation is not necessary.

 

So, what you're saying is... hetrosexual mating doesn't produce homosexuals? My wife is bi, perhaps that doesn't count, but she was born to a heterosexual couple, and since reproduction requires heterosexual banging, I'ma gonna call bullshit on that idea.

 

I would actually argue against that. Lust does not automatically equate to a desire for children. That desire, for whatever reason, would also be a driving force for procreation. Keep in mind that throughout history, entire cultures were based upon arranged marriages. Which meant that the man and woman very well would not have lust for each other. A common saying was for a person to do their duty with their spouse. Children were expected. In more well off families, they could get away with only having the "heir and a spare", and after that procreation and sex would stop. Lower classes needed the extra children to survive and work the land or such. No, lust is not the only driving force of procreation, and depending upon the era, might not even be the main one.

 

Why is it that they always forget that homosexuals include homosexual women? And of course if they then change their argument of putting all homosexual men in an isolated are and claiming that it won't last a generation, they somehow forget that you could put all heterosexual men in that same isolated area and get the exact same results.

 

In this fictitious fantasy of yours it didn't occur to you that gay men could have sex with gay women to produce children? They would then produce heterosexual kids who would then produce with each other.

 

Well I guess you're calling it on your own idea because I never made such a claim. But yeah I agree with your assessment of it.

 

Homosexual sex never results in a birth ever.

I'm not talking about turkey basters and in vitro fertilization I'm talking about two people getting in bed and doing the deed

 

That's a shame, it's a mind numbing form of entertainment.

 

Gay people have sex with people of the same sex. I believe the word you were looking for is bisexual.

 

Actually anal sex can produce something, that's commonly how attorneys are produced.

Disclaimer, that's a funny so if you are a attorney don't take it seriously and sue me or I might believe it to be true. .

 

There's tons of educational shows. In other words, it's not all mind numbing.

 

And spunk loaf..... The things you learn on the internet.

 

Wrong.

I'm a slut, and have had sex thousands of times with hundreds, maybe thousands of different women, and every single time I took steps, or my partner did, to actively prevent pregnancy. To my knowledge, there are no mini-me's running around out there. If so, the mother never informed me of it.

Which is precisely what I wanted, I knew from an early age (like, before I even started having sex on a regular) that I never wanted kids. But I did want lots and lots of sex, which I've been successful in obtaining. At least until I became disabled, but that may not be permanent.

 

No that wasn't the word I was looking for. Again, based on your fictitious fantasy of homosexuals having to live on one continent, gay men could have sex with gay women for the PURPOSE of procreating to have kids.