Homosexuality is not natural and is not normality

[Triumphant_Loser]

Says who?
Have you an actual study to support this claim or are you merely, once again, going on assumption?

No. Anyone who says all X like Y is hard to take seriously. There are over 7 billion people in the world. Chances are, there are exceptions to what is being said.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I didn't use the word "prefer". I said that all women (except cases of anatomic diseases) are anatomically apt to have vaginal sex.

Very few of them are anatomically apt to have anal sex. period.

Speaking of preferences, the world is full of masochists. so I don't discuss preferences

Isn't preference what this whole thread is about? You are of the idea that because a few people you know don't like anal sex all of the homosexual world is at a great disadvantage because they don't get to use vaginas for pleasure. Isn't that the very premise of this entire thread?

So the vagina is what is used for procreation - so what? The development and evolution of pleasure sensors in sexual organs is shown to have arisen for the purpose of making more babies more consistently. Female genitalia could just as easily have been a barren orifice used only for sperm deposits. But along the way nature decided that it was better to add pleasure to the process of procreating because that's what keeps male genitalia coming back for more, thus increasing the odds of continually making healthy offspring. This can be seen from the higher mammals all the way down to insect sex. (I will gladly support that last statement with evidence if needed.)

Along the way, other receptors, all over the body of all kinds of animals, were able to provide pleasure as well. So, again, I ask you, why is that? Why is it that random parts of our bodies, and the bodies of other animals, are able to provide sexual pleasure independent of the procreative process?

If your argument is that vaginas are better than butt holes... Well, that's a fair opinion and I'm sure many people share that opinion. Heck, I personally share that opinion. But to say that an entire group of people are at a disadvantage because you prefer vaginas over butt holes is just ridiculous. They're not.

This whole article could just have easily been titled "I think vaginas are better than butt holes..."
And you know what, that's great! But to formulate some type of worldview around this idea and then to share the nuances of this world view because you like vaginas more than butt holes is a little weird.

 

[LuisDantas]

okay...so natural is not the right word here.
what about biological?

I just want to quote my friend Valery, who once experienced anal sex.
I asked her: "Is there any difference between the two kinds of intercourse?".
she replied: of course there is. The one is heavenly pleasure. the other hellish pain

Some people, of course, will simply not like anal sex.

How is that a problem?

 

[Nada]

I'm aware that coming as we are through the middle ages where so many things have been politicized and lost and found again and lied about and reiterated and used for evil and good -- that Bible translations are somewhat questionable. I realize that we are looking at a history of a lot of unnecessary trouble when we look at the history of Bible translations, and I realize that the Bible has been abused to support southern USA slavery, South American slavery and many other bad things. I'm aware that the current popular translations sell well to the current group of Christians who think anything icky or different must automatically be evil, who think its convenient to ignore the plight of the weak and vulnerable while we watch television and eat on couches. We think its OK to only occasionally contribute and perfectly Christian to just sometimes do a good deed. We are the brother of the destroyer in this sense. It stands to reason that we would accuse homosexuals of all of the evil that we ourselves are guilty of, because that is what guilty people do. So we continue to stand behind these poor translations that help no one.

I love your response.You should write for a news site.Yes, the holy scriptures have been distorted over the many years after Jesus departed.Many powerful people have used the word to serve their own agenda.Political powers have taken control of lands in the name of God and killed many.Now we live in the times of the tv evangelist and people do not take God's word serious because people see these guys jumping around and asking for money.People then assume that all this God stuff is totally bonkers because of what they see that is supposed to be God's people.God's word should not be blamed for the actions of those who misused it.
God's word is true and has stood the test of time.Those who truly want to know God will pray,read and study to know the truth.Dipping into the original languages it was written in will help understand what the words really say and mean.Hebrew,Aramaic and Koine Greek.
People do not do this.People will just read bits and pieces,cherry picking and not fully understanding the entire passages.One must search for God as a person searching for silver it says in the holy scriptures.

...3 For if you cry for discernment, Lift your voice for understanding; 4 If you seek her as silver And search for her as for hidden treasures;5 Then you will discern the fear of the LORD And discover the knowledge of God.…Proverbs 2:4 (King Solomon)

So here King Solomon is saying that searching for the knowledge of God is like searching for hidden treasure.A hidden treasure is not exposed and easy to find.We must put forth effort and look for it with a sense of intensity.When people mine for gold it is usually done by panning in rivers where the gold literally washes up and is easy to find.If you dig just a little bit deeper you will find chunks of gold.Now if you dig way way deeper and search more you will hit silver.
Silver is found deeper in the earth than gold is.So if we do as the holy scriptures says and dig deep into the bible as we are searching for silver,we will discover the knowledge of God and discern things.Of course we must pray and keep asking God for a better understanding of the holy scriptures so we may better serve Him and fully comprehend His message

Now...as far as blaming homosexuals for all the evils, I don't know about that.People who go around pointing fingers at homosexuals and constantly nagging them is not very christian like.All humans commit sins but the ones that have remained taboo over the centuries will always get special attention from others.Now that the curtain has fallen and everyone is out,it has become almost fully acceptable.The world is changing but God's word still stands.It has remained the same for thousands of years and contains knowledge that can be used in any time.We already know how God feels about homosexuality and those who want to be true christians can not participate in this behavior.God's word does not change, yet you see in the news about churches around the world that are now accepting gays in clergy.This is a sign of false religion.You can see who really serves God truly buy the fruits they bear.

So when one reads and studies the word of God thoroughly, and see's how God feels about homosexuality,one can then understand fully.

 

[McBell]

So when one reads and studies the word of God thoroughly, and see's how God feels about homosexuality,one can then understand fully.

Not that it means a lick of two cricket farts to non-choir members.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I'm, if you say so. You've claimed that supporting gay rights is equivalent to murder and that gay men are diseased pedophiles. You'll excuse me for reading any hostility into that. Oh, and a conspiracy of political correctness makes religious fundamentalists the only ones willing to speak the truth.

Hmmm, you have a good imagination don't you. Now let's come back to planet earth and start speaking the truth without exaggeration shall we...hmmm

 

[Robert.Evans]

nat·u·ral
ˈnaCH(ə)rəl/
adjective

1. 1.
   existing in or caused by nature

Homosexual behavior is found in nearly every animal species on the planet. It is found in nature, therefore it is natural.

Homosexual behavior in animals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Depends on how you define natural. There are other ways.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Sorry, fresh out. Could we interest you in no-homo-bro navy instead?

 

[Estro Felino]

Isn't preference what this whole thread is about? You are of the idea that because a few people you know don't like anal sex all of the homosexual world is at a great disadvantage because they don't get to use vaginas for pleasure. Isn't that the very premise of this entire thread?

homosexuality is not a preference. It is something innate that happens to you and you have to accept it

S But along the way nature decided that it was better to add pleasure to the process of procreating because that's what keeps male genitalia coming back for more, thus increasing the odds of continually making healthy offspring. This can be seen from the higher mammals all the way down to insect sex. (I will gladly support that last statement with evidence if needed.)

if a man doesn't want to procreate, there is vasectomy. a very good and definitive solution.
Using anal sex as birth control method is grotesque and squalid

Along the way, other receptors, all over the body of all kinds of animals, were able to provide pleasure as well. So, again, I ask you, why is that? Why is it that random parts of our bodies, and the bodies of other animals, are able to provide sexual pleasure independent of the procreative process?

again: the fact that some people are anatomically apt to turn non-sexual parts of the body into sexual ones....doesn't imply that all people can or are anatomically apt to.

This whole article could just have easily been titled "I think vaginas are better than butt holes..."

No. Maybe it should have been: Vaginas are biologically compatible with penises. Anus is not, unless there is both anatomic predisposition and intensive training.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Thank you. This new layout ran me out for a while, but it's good to be back. But no, it's not "unnatural," because the very definition of "unnatural" literally means "not found in nature." We know for a fact that homosexual intercourse is found in nature, therefore it is, by definition, natural. It really is as simple as that. If you want to believe gay sex is a "sin," then fine, that is your belief. But you cannot say it is "unnatural," because it can literally be observed in nature.

Well then murder is natural. So why do we have prisons?

 

[Robert.Evans]

What I'm trying to say is that:
1.) natural = found in nature
2.) unnatural= not found in nature
3.) Homosexual intercourse is found in nature
4.) Therefore, Homosexual intercourse is natural, not unnatural.

It depends on how one defines it. So your argument is mute:

natural
ˈnatʃ(ə)r(ə)l/
adjective

1. 1.
   existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind.
   "carrots contain a natural antiseptic"
2. 2.
   in accordance with the nature of, or circumstances surrounding, someone or something.
   "sharks have no natural enemies"

noun

1. 1.
   a person having an innate talent for a particular task or activity.
   "she was a natural for television work"
2. 2.
   MUSIC
   a sign (♮) denoting a natural note when a previous sign or the key signature would otherwise demand a sharp or a flat.
   • 
     
     adverb

informaldialect

1. 1.
   naturally.
   "keep walking—just act natural"

 

[Robert.Evans]

Nope.

Worldwide HIV & AIDS Statistics | AVERT

50% of the global AIDS population is female. Nearly 10% are children.

That didn't come from two dudes porkin'.

It would depned on what research you look at. The last one I saw which was quite recent, and on this site, said it was largely gays. Might I ask how it is that the women have got infected?

 

[jonathan180iq]

It has remained the same for thousands of years and contains knowledge that can be used in any time.

Not that this is actually part of this conversation, but I think we should check the original sources to verify that God's word is unchanging. Can you cite that please?

 

[Robert.Evans]

I yearn for the day that the "AIDS is cauzed by teh ghey" myth is finally laid to rest.

First seen in primates they think in Africa and then a few men there, but in the west, in America. But it most largely seen in gay men. So where has it mostly come from then? What do we deduce from that? That the milkman brought it with the milk?

 

[jonathan180iq]

It would depned on what research you look at. The last one I saw which was quite recent, and on this site, said it was largely gays. Might I ask how it is that the women have got infected?

So cite your reference.
If it blamed the gays, I'm sure it very reputable and ready for peer review.

 

[gsa]

Well then murder is natural. So why do we have prisons?

The fact that something is natural does not mean that it is good. There are things that are wholly artificial that are wonderful. Where would we be without ibuprofen? Roads? Airplanes? How many people have been able to have children via in vitro fertilization? How many people benefit from our newest cancer treatments?

You know what else is natural? Cancer, the AIDS boogeyman you keep talking about, asteroid strikes, venomous snakes, an entire universe that, in the words of Neil Degrasse Tyson, is looking for ways to kill us. These things are quite natural.

For that matter, are prisons natural? You'll note that they are relatively recent modern inventions for punishment, as opposed to execution and banishment.

This is the problem. Nature defies your understanding of what is natural, so you are left making incoherent arguments that are ultimately rooted in a book written by people that make the Taliban look scientifically literate.

 

[Brickjectivity]

If we were judging homosexuals by their fruits there would be no restriction against homosexuality. We lost track of what the various scriptures were talking about, and this remains a finger-pointing problem and a situation where the scriptures are conveniently mistranslated to maintain a convenient fascia of self righteousness. We like having someone else be evil. You didn't cause this problem, but you seem to be buying into it.

Now...as far as blaming homosexuals for all the evils, I don't know about that.

Yes, it is frequently done. Just like rock'n roll was blamed for many evils, and dancing and makeup and all kinds of irrelevant things have been blamed. We are like...the Victorians two centuries ago. They had so many problems, but they were focused on trivialities and judgement of others and fears of criticism. They inherited a form of godliness, but they didn't incorporate godliness into their lives. The trend is to find some thing to criticize so that we can avoid responsibility for all of the work we're supposed to be doing.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Do you think anal beads and anal stimulation is something that only gay men appreciate? If you do, then you're quite mistaken.
Stimulation of the prostate through sexual means via the anal canal can be very pleasurable in both men and women.

If you believe in design, then why is such a thing so pleasurable if it was never meant to be used?
If you don't believe in design, then this whole "natural/unnatural" nonsense is a strawman, right?

Also, and not to get too personal here - but as someone who claims to be homosexual you seem to carry an inordinate amount of self loathing. That can't be healthy.

That would depend on what you mean by design. If you are saying that God designed it, then show we where it says that. It evolves, consciously. There is within that good and evil and it expresses itself in various ways.

 

[jonathan180iq]

First seen in primates they think in Africa and then a few men there, but in the west, in America. But it most largely seen in gay men. So where has it mostly come from then? What do we deduce from that? That the milkman brought it with the milk?

You want a patient zero? Good luck.
Until you can find one, then your claim that "AIDS comes from 'dem gays" is going to need some work.

How DID the women get it? How is it possible that 50% of the world's AIDS population are female when we KNOW it comes from 'all those ****'?

 

[gsa]

Depends on how you define natural. There are other ways.

How are you defining natural? As in accordance with Jewish, Christian and Islamic scriptures, and the derivative theological traditions that they spawned? If so, the track record on understanding nature is pretty abysmal and you'll forgive rational people for rejecting it.