Homosexuality Isn't Natural

That is a lot of talk for someone who thinks he is right.

If everything that happens in the universe is natural, then everything is natural. But if natural has a meaning, then when a 6 legged-dog is born, it is unnatural since evolution/mother nature intended dogs to have 4 legs. Homosexuality isn't what evolution intended. Evolution may have screwed up and "accidentally" allowed through a few homosexual penguins or whole species, but that's not the norm.

And anyway, homosexuality is a choice. It doesn't make you a bad person to make that choice, but it's a choice anyway.

You love chocolate cake? For 50 million dollars, you could train yourself to actually and I mean actually, hate chocolate cake.

If you're abused sexually by a parent, or if you saw horrible parental examples, or etc,....... it could have trained you to choose homosexuality as the more comfortable choice. But it is still a choice, and for the good of the homosexual, can be unlearned when they're ready.

 

The fact that the human animal is innately pushed into the direction of heterosexuality can be witnessed in the number of homosexual couples who have one of them play the more masculine part while the other party plays the more feminine role.

It is NOT rational to hate homosexuals, but it IS rational to realize that homosexuality is an aberration, not a right condition for the human being.

 

It's not homosexuals, it's aids they're afraid. And what the gay mafia doesn't want to tell you that aids is high in the homosexual community.

 

Then your wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

I read that as

"The reason its bad is because I say so and Jesus agrees with me!"

 

I'm not religious.

And grow up.

 

Exactly.

 

You would be surprised how wimminz respond in a sexual way to a guy who will throw on a dress... at least that's what I'm told....

 

Deviations, mutations, alterations, etc are also a part of nature. They are abnormal in that they are not common, but they are still a part of nature.

Says you.

Some people may make the choice to try out homosexuality, or may have been exposed to it and find that they like it. It doesn't have to be from abuse. And just because they didn't identify themselves as homosexual before doesn't mean it was a choice. Like a person who discovers a talent halfway through their lives, they simply could have uncovered a truth about themselves that has been there all along. In a world that teaches people that one way is right and the other way is wrong, or where one way is by far the most common and visible, that confusion is easy to understand.

However, there are homosexuals who know from a very young age that they are homsexual. If you like ice cream, is it a choice that you like ice cream, or do you simply like ice cream?

 

I'm not exactly sure what being "natural" has to do with anything...

We have examples of brutal gang rape and genocide in nature... that doesn't make them acceptable actions for human beings to engage in.

 

Those things get a really bad rep but they're natural and we need to embrace them. I'm into veganism and I'm in a new age cult. Our leader's earth name is Zzzogigoogoohudgie. Through him we contact the raelians who are higher spirits from other galaxies. They've got 142 different gender coefficients which means that sexuality with them is not on a three dimensional plane like ours but a nine dimensional plane. What star sign are you?

 

...and when they do its just as perverted.

 

A Pentagon document classifies homosexuality as a mental disorder, decades after mental health experts abandoned that position.

The document outlines retirement or other discharge policies for service members with physical disabilities, and in a section on defects lists homosexuality alongside mental retardation and personality disorders.

Critics said the reference underscores the Pentagon's failing policies on gays, and adds to a culture that has created uncertainty and insecurity around the treatment of homosexual service members, leading to anti-gay harassment.

Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Jeremy M. Martin said the policy document is under review.

The Pentagon has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy that prohibits the military from inquiring about the sex lives of service members but requires discharges of those who openly acknowledge being gay.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/6/20/92405.shtml?s=us

- - - Updated - - -

Homosexuality is a mental disorder. Now before anyone goes off with the old "the AMA removed it as a disorder" crap, remember this: The APA is a political lobbying group that represents less than half of American psychiatrists/psychologists, and NO psychiatrists/psychologists in other nations. In other words, they represent squat, and their position is political, not authentically medical. Same sex attraction was always considered a disorder according to the APA until recently. So why the change:

Protests by gay rights activists against the APA began in 1970 when the organization held its convention in San Francisco. The activists disrupted the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, gay rights activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you." To put is bluntly, the American Psychological Association buckled and caved to protesters, and therefore have no legitimacy now.

So the APA can be, and is, wrong. The current APA thinks that they were "wrong back then," and "right now." But certainly, the opposite can be true, that is was right back then and wrong now. I think that they were right before and wrong now because they now fear liberal retaliation and political correctness that did not exist before.

 

I

The problem is that for some of the less knowledgable on this thread the concept of natural implies the behavior of the majority. They don't really understand that natural means existing in nature. The term they actually want to use is aberrant behavior.

 

Procreation of the species is the most natural, and most base instinct, of all species.

If a human being has an aversion to copulating with the opposite sex, that aversion is UN-natural, as well as abnormal and a mental disorder.

= = = = = = = = =

Homosexuality is a mental disorder. Now before anyone goes off with the old "the AMA removed it as a disorder" crap, remember this: The APA is a political lobbying group that represents less than half of American psychiatrists/psychologists, and NO psychiatrists/psychologists in other nations. In other words, they represent squat, and their position is political, not authentically medical. Same sex attraction was always considered a disorder according to the APA until recently. So why the change:

Protests by gay rights activists against the APA began in 1970 when the organization held its convention in San Francisco. The activists disrupted the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, gay rights activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you." To put is bluntly, the American Psychological Association buckled and caved to protesters, and therefore have no legitimacy now.

So the APA can be, and is, wrong. The current APA thinks that they were "wrong back then," and "right now." But certainly, the opposite can be true, that is was right back then and wrong now. I think that they were right before and wrong now because they now fear liberal retaliation and political correctness that did not exist before.

 

What did we do before women ? or was it the other way around ? Gays are fine, I wish that they would shut up some times though, It does get heavy some times with the demands that they want. Let them marry, who cares, I have neighbors that I would swap any day for gay couples.

 

Well we are making intellectual progress. Now at least instead of debating natural and unnatural you are starting to discuss natural and most natural. A fairly fallacious arguement but at least it represents some progress.

 

I'm still trying to figure out how someone can say abnormal or unnatural acts are normal and natural

 

Homosexuality harms no one.
Murder does.

There is not need to use arguments that are exceptionally stupid. I bet you could come up with more valid comparisons.

 

In literature it's a classic tactic to deny, ignore, dismiss, and twist conditions so that the deviant and/or the evil character can purposefully blut the lines to confuse people so they can appear as not any diff3erent than normal or good people.

Intelligent people will see through this tactic and any other dishonest tactics they throw out at people who won't accept them.

 

It sounds like you're doing one of two things. You're either taking such absurd and inarticulate views that it could in all practicality be called a straw man, or you're deliberately misunderstanding the *meaning*of what is meant when it is called unnatural. I'd recommend neither.

Yes homosexuality is inherently unnatural. Let's set aside the silly stuff about clothes and TV, because it just signals failure to understand the point.

It's really quite simple: certain organs were meant for certain functions. That's it. Even biologically, there is a discernable "intent". For example, the eyes were intended for seeing, not lifting. The anus was also meant for one thing, and not the other. Now obviously heterosexuals engage in anal sex, but here's the thing: people who say homosexuality is unnatural can only be intellectually consistent (so far as I can see) if they also hold heterosexual anal sex to be unnatural. That isn't exactly a homophobic position to hold, if held consistently for both genders.

The bit about it being around for a long time is entirely extraneous. Goat "loving" has been around for thousands of years too, but that doesn't make it natural, nor does it make it acceptable. The goat's anus was made for doing one thing, and there is a certain thing that it was NOT made for doing.

This route that you and others try to take is entirely wrong. You try to challenge people when they are, speaking of the intellectually articulate ones, right on a technicality. By doing so you essentially concur that the grounds on which their point is levied Is of merit. That is your mistake. Whether it is natural or unnatural is irrelevant. Just apply the non aggression principle which, even if not by name, is incredibly popular it the youth.

 

This should be good...

If there is a point in time where men begin to like men and women begin to like women, that is a manifestation of human nature. A natural deviation from the norm. If blue tulips start appearing where there were formerly white and red, is that unnatural? At one point a tongue is merely used to taste. However, if circumstances and experiences in the particular life-form prove consistent, the tongue may grow long and hard and rough and be used to grab, like another hand.

The problem with your explanation is that you believe nature is static or that things in nature have one purpose, which is not true. The purpose of things in nature changes overtime. It's not so much the purpose but the use. If it is not used, it usually goes. And what is needed is usually developed. Changes come all the time. There is no set nature to anything. Thus, with human beings, it is in the nature of a homosexual person to like another person of the same sex. Why? Who knows. The riddles of life.

I don't know who is mentioning homophobia, but I am not. What I am mentioning is xenophobia.

If men start banging goats, that's a natural turnout of man's nature. If some men do it, than it is a part of human nature as a whole that some men deviate from the normal pattern of sexual behavior. But it is all part of human nature. If some men go crazy, than that is a part of human nature as well. What a man does, regardless of how often everyone else does it, is part of their nature and so part of human nature as a whole.

Homosexuality is not unnatural. It is different. Sex can be for pleasure...and it can be for reproduction. Anything can be used as one wishes it to. It is natural to feel pleasure from contact. It is natural to seek pleasure from contact. If homosexuality is unnatural, then from where does it come? Are homosexuals forcing themselves to be homosexual? It's not really a like, it's a question of forcing themselves to like it? Or deceiving themselves to like it?

Could it be that they naturally like people of the same sex. It is in their nature and they may have preferences different than other people?

 

False. It harms them, in many ways.

Thanks Captain Obvious.

Yet you do all the time. Comparing murder and homosexuality is a great example.





[video=youtube;mI9_Q3lNvoY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI9_Q3lNvoY[/video]

 

Now all you have to do is explain exactly what special treatment homosexuals are asking for. Try to be specific and provide documentation.

 

I would guess from your analysis that since the mouth was designed for ingesting food that kissing is unnatural. And of course since the breast was designed for feeding babies. Guess by your logic we are all performing unnatural acts but by golly, now that you have shown us the light we can all move toward purity.

 

So Is sex among heterosexuals for pleasure unnatural if the purpose is not procreation. How about sex outside of marriage. Is it OK for couples to have sex outside of the fertile period each month. How about masturbation. How about oral sex among heterosexuals?

Guess all of the above must be unnatural since the purpose is not to produce offspring. What a bleak world we could have if we only tried a little harder to be more "natural".