Homosexuality is "Contrary to Natural Law"?

[Estro Felino]

Why not? He's entertaining. It's fun reading his wacky posts and seeing where they go next.

I thought that this was a democratic forum, when one could express their personal view, without offending anyone. If my personal view offends someone, I ask for forgiveness. It's not intentional.
But I only see that the lack of empathy produces impossibility to respect other culture and other visions.
Homologation is the root of intolerance, and a massified society is the result

 

[Revoltingest]

I thought that this was a democratic forum, when one could express their personal view, without offending anyone. If my personal view offends someone, I ask for forgiveness. It's not intentional.
But I only see that the lack of empathy produces impossibility to respect other culture and other visions.
Homologation is the root of intolerance, and a massified society is the result

People often lose sight of the spirit of tolerance when disagreement is so fundamental.
Ironically, those giving you grief will generally have their own loopy beliefs too.
Even in a 'democratic' forum, things will be messy & rancorous at times.

 

[Smart_Guy]

People often lose sight of the spirit of tolerance when disagreement is so fundamental.
Ironically, those giving you grief will generally have their own loopy beliefs too.
Even in a 'democratic' forum, things will be messy & rancorous at times.

Could you please repeat the first two lines in simple English?

 

[samosasauce]

We barely understand nature, to be honest. No one should be claiming they know its "laws" well enough so that they can destroy the lives of people. Besides, if it exists, doesn't that make it natural? Everything has come from nature, and everything henceforth is nature; humans are too proud to admit this, though.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Mortal humans define nature according to their own selfish needs some times, not knowing that other beings can smell their blood from far away in a distant realm. (what the heck am I saying?)

I believe, and not justifying, that nature is what spontaneously takes place in a systematic behavior and form without having thoughts of nature itself. Only then things can be natural.

I seem to have strayed off of the main discussion of this thread. If so, then I offer my humble apologies.

 

[Cardboard]

If you are a transsexual, it means that you are more male than female. So, pardon me, if I am frank, but maybe ordinary women have a more "perfect" endocrine system, so they feel pleasures that you can't feel.

You know debating the sexual function and feeling of vaginal sex with a person that has one , from a person who does not have one, is like my wife trying to explain to me how it feels to have a penis, you are just grasping at straws now.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Damn, I dropped my laptop and it bluescreened on me, so I lost my reply.

Anyway, I was just saying that although I'm on testosterone therapy now, before that, my body ran on estrogen like any other female's and such, so I understand the female side of things more than you, Hay. Regardless of the trans thing, it's just a fact that many, if not most, females don't have vaginal orgasms. Clitoral orgasms are much more common and easier to achieve. Many women are shamed because they can't have vaginal orgasms after trying it and think there's something wrong with them. Not to mention that female sexuality has been shamed in Western culture and particularly with the likes of Freud. That shaming is based on phallocentrism, because our notions about sexuality are often based around male (penile) pleasure and penetration. Many men have this idea that to be a "real man", you make a woman have an orgasm with your penis. Your posts reflect that sort of thinking and it's wrong.

 

[Estro Felino]

Damn, I dropped my laptop and it bluescreened on me, so I lost my reply.

Anyway, I was just saying that although I'm on testosterone therapy now, before that, my body ran on estrogen like any other female's and such, so I understand the female side of things more than you, Hay. Regardless of the trans thing, it's just a fact that many, if not most, females don't have vaginal orgasms. Clitoral orgasms are much more common and easier to achieve. Many women are shamed because they can't have vaginal orgasms after trying it and think there's something wrong with them. Not to mention that female sexuality has been shamed in Western culture and particularly with the likes of Freud. That shaming is based on phallocentrism, because our notions about sexuality are often based around male (penile) pleasure and penetration. Many men have this idea that to be a "real men", you make a woman have an orgasm with your penis. Your posts reflect that sort of thinking and it's wrong.

I am exactly the opposite of you. I wish I was born female, because women enjoy much more than men. But I guess that it is also due also the influence from my cultural background. US is male, Italy is female. I mean androcentrism\gynocentrism

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I am exactly the opposite of you. I wish I was born female, because women enjoy much more than men. But I guess that it is also due also the influence from my cultural background. US is male, Italy is female. I mean androcentrism\gynocentrism

Culture has nothing to do with me being a guy.

 

[Estro Felino]

Culture has nothing to do with me being a guy.

yes, I was talking about my personal situation, not yours.
And I confessed it to you so you would understand how empathetic I am, with female sexuality

 

[McBell]

You know debating the sexual function and feeling of vaginal sex with a person that has one , from a person who does not have one, is like my wife trying to explain to me how it feels to have a penis, you are just grasping at straws now.

I disagree.
He has been grasping at straws from get go.

 

[McNap]

I was thinking of my ex boyfriend who confessed me that he was eurotophobic. In fact he told me that he was afraid of vagina, when he was in a relationship with a girl. Her Vagina looked like a cave to him. A deep insatiable and greedy cave, ready to swallow his penis.
This is a phobia. And he did explain to me that he found a male anus more reassuring. As you can see, there are straight men who go gay because of this phobia. I have just proved it to you

And how was that for you?
After all it WAS an impossible love.
I mean, didn't you feel cheated?

 

[Smart_Guy]

Darn it, this thread is turning me on.

I'm gonna unsubscribe.

 

[Revoltingest]

Darn it, this thread is turning me on.
I'm gonna unsubscribe.

Perhaps me Sharon Stone impression can quell yer ardor....

 

[McBell]

Quagmire stole my signature, & is holding it for ransom!
And if I don't pay up soon, he'll start sending it back to me
one word at a time. He said so!

Well, at least you are getting it back, right?

 

[Estro Felino]

I can't find a definition of natural law that does not use law in its definition which makes the definition invalid, so for me.
.

I can find a definition of natural law. Nature has made human organs useful for just precise actions.
That is, vagina is for being penetrated by penis. Vagina is the cavity of life, through which we all were born.
Anus is for expelling body waste. Nothing more

 

[Smart_Guy]

Perhaps me Sharon Stone impression can quell yer ardor....

I.... I didn't see that...

I subscribed from this thread...

:run:

 

[McBell]

I can find a definition of natural law. Nature has made human organs useful for just precise actions.
That is, vagina is for being penetrated by penis. Vagina is the cavity of life, through which we all were born.
Anus is for expelling body waste. Nothing more

Where did you find that useless self serving definition?

 

[viole]

I really don't think that "natural law" actually exists.

If it exists in nature, it's natural, and humans are always part of nature. It just offends our sensibilities to deem the things we create and do as "natural."

I see where people were going with the whole "natural law" thing but the way it's tied into religion and such becomes ridiculous.

I agree. There is not such a thing as natural law, for nothing unnatural can possibly exist in nature and nature does not seem carry any obvious moral valence.

To believe in natural laws is actually dangerous. The so called naturalistic fallacy, or appeal to nature, assumes that there are things that are according to natural laws and things that aren't, and we should pursue the former.

Typical consequences of this way of thinking are things like Social Darwinism or worse.

Ciao

- viole

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

When we hold ideas about what it means to be a man, or a woman, or gay, or straight that are so extreme and sexist and stereotypical and rigid and untrue and unrealistic, then it can only be said that such a person is confused and has no idea who or what they are. That's a sad place to be.