Homosexuality is not natural and is not normality

[lewisnotmiller]

This whole thread strikes me as weird. Show me the 'straight, normal person' who doesnt masturbate, or give/receive oral sex, or other forms of non-penis to vaginal intercourse/pleasure. Surely these would all count as 'unnatural'?

People need to get over their obsession with who sticks what in who's butt. Either that or lets go the whole hog and try to 'normalise' all sexual behaviour. That'd be ridiculous and unworkable, of course, but at least it would be intellectually consistent.

 

[gsa]

This whole thread strikes me as weird. Show me the 'straight, normal person' who doesnt masturbate, or give/receive oral sex, or other forms of non-penis to vaginal intercourse/pleasure. Surely these would all count as 'unnatural'?

People need to get over their obsession with who sticks what in who's butt. Either that or lets go the whole hog and try to 'normalise' all sexual behaviour. That'd be ridiculous and unworkable, of course, but at least it would be intellectually consistent.

This is why I think it is simply anti-gay animus posing as something more objective. It is absurd to call any sexual behavior, even truly repulsive behavior (i.e., pedophilia) "unnatural," given what we know about the kinds of sexual behavior found in nature. Nature is instead being upheld as some sort of normative guide, which is equally absurd.

 

[McBell]

Even homosexuals know that MALE/FEMALE procreation, evolutionarily, is absolutely necessary for the survival of any species.

Yes, male/female is required for species survival.
However, male/female sex is not required.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm having a hard time with the OP. What is it supposed to mean?

Aren't you over-romanticizing "natural" sex?

It is natural to be impulsive, unfaithful, unrespecting of one's mates and to breed without being commited to either a relationship or to parenthood.

Should anyone have that as a goal?

 

[McBell]

Of course it is absolutely normal that two gay men feel the urge to make love to each other, and to do whatever they like in bed-
I would never dare comment what they do in bed.

the problem is that straight people have, potentially, much more possibilities to create a perfect and healthy sex life together.
that's the truth. and denying it, means to neglect gay people and the disadvantages deriving from their condition

Yet all you have done is made a bold empty claim.
Care to substantiate your bold empty claim with something more concrete than "I said so"?

 

[dust1n]

Okay, regarding species, which would include all living things, it would be factually wrong to state all species require genders or sex at all. Millions of species exist via replication.

 

[Robert.Evans]

There are parameters, sometimes described as "laws" but really just constraints on movement. It is no different than the flow of water being impeded and "directed" by geological barriers. Anyway, if you are claiming that there is some "purpose" behind nature which renders some acts "natural" and some acts "unnatural," just say so and don't beat around the bush. And of course, I'd ask for some evidence to substantiate this argument.

Why not substantiate your argument: ''The body is not designed to do anything.''

 

[Robert.Evans]

No we do not see design everywhere. What survives isn't "luck" but what works when you subject it to over millions of years of natural world. And sometimes we see throwbacks that no longer work in our current environment. Think of the tailbone.

That doen't mean intelligence is not behind it, now does it.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

That doen't mean intelligence is not behind it, now does it.

It does, actually. Sorry about that.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I don't mean that gay people are not normal; I just say that homosexual sex is not natural;

So gay people are normal, but when they have sex it isn't normal?

It doesn't make any sense.

Some people are gay, get over it.

 

[Robert.Evans]

It does, actually. Sorry about that.

You need a lot of faith to believe that Spiney. Processes don't just come from nowhere with all the power needed to shape randomness

 

[LuisDantas]

Not a lot of faith. Just a modicum of honesty and education.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't think "natural" is all that important anyway.

Hmmm...this needs elaboration.
Even though I don't find "normal" & "natural" important, what occurs in nature would by definition be natural. This would apply to homosexuality, which is a frequent natural occurrence. "Abnormal" would be a matter of low frequency & dysfunction. But there again, homosexuality would be normal...as much so as other marginal traits, eg, left handedness, color blindness, engineers.
In the area of morality, we might even decide that some natural behavior is wrong, eg, rape, which is widely practiced among humans, fur seals, etc.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

People need to get over their obsession with who sticks what in who's butt

I couldn't agree more, and it's a private matter anyway. Some of the views expressed here on RF just seem weird to me.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I hope that the title is not misread. I don't mean that gay people are not normal; I just say that homosexual sex is not natural; of course, love is always natural, whether it is heterosexual or homosexual.

Au contraire, sex that I've had with women felt just as natural as sex I've had with men.

Because, as for sex, in a heterosexual intercourse there is perfection and it deals with something complementary.

I think you are idealizing penis-vagina intercourse. I don't. As awesome as it is, it's merely one of the many ways eros can manifest. Human sexuality offers many many avenues of reaching erogenous zones and achieving orgasm. But penis-vagina intercourse assuming to be the ideal form of sex negates the ultimate and most powerful aphrodisiac:

The Mind.

So homosexual people (who are born that way) do deserve to fall in love with one another and being in a relationship with one another.
But two gay people are not as lucky as a straight couple. Because there is no complementary sex.

LOL you know there are so many straight women out there who despise penis-vagina intercourse, and prefer using fingers or going strictly with oral sex?

So being born gay is disadvantaged situation, compared to being born straight.
This disadvantage derives from the fact that straight people have a wider range of choice, being the majority. Gay people don't.

Socio-political circumstances, though. Not an inherently biological disadvantage.

Saying that gay people are as lucky as straight people is a very hypocritical and hateful comment.

Your posts unfortunately speak IMO as incredibly full of self-loathing. So, I'll say this based on my interepretation as such....Relax, dude. Being queer is just as good as being straight in terms of inherent value.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

ou know there are so many straight women out there who despise penis-vagina intercourse, and prefer using fingers or going strictly with oral sex?

You are so right. Not that I have done a survey or anything.....

And the conventional approach can get boring after a while, a little bit of imagination goes a long way.

 

[Jumi]

That doen't mean intelligence is not behind it, now does it.

So you believe intelligent being(s) designed life including humans, tapeworms and bananas? Did those also design people to be gay and all various interpretations of reality like religions?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Did those also design people to be gay and all various interpretations of reality like religions?

Yes, that's an interesting question. Why would God create gays and then declare gay sex to be sinful? Maybe God is a bit indecisive?

 

[McBell]

Yes, that's an interesting question. Why would God create gays and then declare gay sex to be sinful? Maybe God is a bit indecisive?

Or perhaps god is not the prude he is so often made out to be?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Or perhaps god is not the prude he is so often made out to be?

The idea that a supreme being would have in any interest in what people get up to in the bedroom seems absurd to me anyway.