Other than religious, what reason is there to ban homosexuality?
Scroll to see replies
Because all religions oppose homosexuality. Lots of western countries' foundations have religious backgrounds. The same way the commandments influence laws, as does the Bible in general, I guess.
You're quite forward thinking by saying "western" countries ban homosexuality, eastern countries' banning of it doesn't matter because we're all backwards thinking Neanderthals?
I have nothing against homosexuals. Do you. I may be religious, but I'm still finding myself let alone a religion, so who am I to oppose who you're banging? It's whatever
You're quite forward thinking by saying "western" countries ban homosexuality, eastern countries' banning of it doesn't matter because we're all backwards thinking Neanderthals?
I have nothing against homosexuals. Do you. I may be religious, but I'm still finding myself let alone a religion, so who am I to oppose who you're banging? It's whatever
Original post by Galaxie501
Fragile soul? Coming from a guy who's in the regressive SJW who's triggered by literally everything?
@ivybridge What do you think of Milo Yiannopoulos, regressivism and 3rd wave feminism?
@ivybridge What do you think of Milo Yiannopoulos, regressivism and 3rd wave feminism?
Oh give over with the *******s political jargon.
Original post by Galaxie501
Heterosexuality is indeed forced down everyones throat from birth. Its called evolution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIpkdusnIkE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIpkdusnIkE
Homosexuality is also something displayed heavily in nature, which is similar to how Darwin produced his theory. Point?
Original post by Galaxie501
Heterosexuality is indeed forced down everyones throat from birth. Its called evolution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIpkdusnIkE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIpkdusnIkE
Mate, you're actually chatting ****. I have no idea why you linked me to that video but I'll just just take a wild guess that you're one of those people who thinks everyone who disagrees with you is a "triggered SJW"... But like I said, do you!
Original post by epage
I know I wasn't asked but:
Milo yiannopoulos is an idiot and the fact that he is gay doesn't make him a better person. He is still homophobic sexist and racist.
3rd wave feminism shouldn't be given that title and the ideas of 'Waves' in feminism is stupid. I am a feminist although I believe the name needs reinventing. It has become associated too much with hate and because feminists also campaign for men's rights now, the name needs to reflect that so everyone can understand its mutually beneficial.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Milo yiannopoulos is an idiot and the fact that he is gay doesn't make him a better person. He is still homophobic sexist and racist.
3rd wave feminism shouldn't be given that title and the ideas of 'Waves' in feminism is stupid. I am a feminist although I believe the name needs reinventing. It has become associated too much with hate and because feminists also campaign for men's rights now, the name needs to reflect that so everyone can understand its mutually beneficial.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Right, there's too much rebutt here, but I am curious about one thing. Do you think a girl can decide 2 days after having sex that she was raped, even though she consented and enjoyd it at the time? Why do you think Milo is an idiot? Is it racist to cite facts and stastics? He's not a sexist, nor a racist. Thats factually incorrect.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by ivybridge
Guys - let's not even entertain this utter drivel.
I am not asking for your permission to be happy.
That third one's interracial!
chill, bruh. sounds like you're trying to be something you're not. my gay pride friends are really chilled out,
maybe you should try it too
and you could get your point across like us heterosexuals do,
why you think there's more of us then are of you,
I really wanna help your cause boo but until you simmer down we can't share a glass of booze,
talk about this politics the right damn way,
show me your light your attitude's acting like a lampshade,
but whatever, you're too angry,
here's some insight you might find it handy,
take a step back from the limelight sometimes,
let your sons rise in your gay community, but the sunsets if you don't sunshine through your intuition b,
so grow up, fold up,
little soldier, your keyboards warrior days can be over,
be sobre, told ya, it wasn't that hard was it?
take a chill pill, you're at poundland tryna empty your darn wallet,
you want something so small, with all of that action,
what am i getting from it? not even a fraction,
of what i could be getting with your jackson
ideologies,
but at the moment it all seems to be biology
this, that, let's take another step into the chronology
of the universe,
but if i do, you do first,
need to relax yeah baby
maybe you should try it too
and you could get your point across like us heterosexuals do,
why you think there's more of us then are of you,
I really wanna help your cause boo but until you simmer down we can't share a glass of booze,
talk about this politics the right damn way,
show me your light your attitude's acting like a lampshade,
but whatever, you're too angry,
here's some insight you might find it handy,
take a step back from the limelight sometimes,
let your sons rise in your gay community, but the sunsets if you don't sunshine through your intuition b,
so grow up, fold up,
little soldier, your keyboards warrior days can be over,
be sobre, told ya, it wasn't that hard was it?
take a chill pill, you're at poundland tryna empty your darn wallet,
you want something so small, with all of that action,
what am i getting from it? not even a fraction,
of what i could be getting with your jackson
ideologies,
but at the moment it all seems to be biology
this, that, let's take another step into the chronology
of the universe,
but if i do, you do first,
need to relax yeah baby
Original post by ivybridge
Ugh that's disgusting; they're wearing the Apple symbol.
Original post by Galaxie501
Right, there's too much rebutt here, but I am curious about one thing. Do you think a girl can decide 2 days after having sex that she was raped, even though she consented and enjoyd it at the time? Why do you think Milo is an idiot? Is it racist to cite facts and stastics? He's not a sexist, nor a racist. Thats factually incorrect.
No, because then she'd have falsely accused someone of a crime which is wrong. I do believe in innocent until proven guilty. But how do you know she enjoyed it? How do you know she consented? She may have consented at the time but changed her mind half way through, that is still rape. You cannot just 'decide' that someone raped you. you do not 'decide' that someone mugged or robbed you. And if a rape victim does take time to come forward it is most likely because they are scared of the rape culture that exists and the blame that she will inevitably encounter.
Milo is a good debater, I'll give you that. I feel bad for the guy that he was raised with such toxic views of homosexuality and women. No it isn't racist to cite facts, but it is racist to use them to shame people for their actions and to disregard peoples experiences with racism and sexism.
Nature is designed in a way to allow life to keep existing no matter how and it works extremely well hence the vast amount of life today! When it comes to animals then in the majority of cases nature requires male and females to mate, hence my conclusion of another reason being Nature.
If other species partake in sex with the same sex then this is simply sexual pleasure and an example is your dog humping your leg or a rabbit humping a cover.. simply just sexual relief in any means possible!
SO I will say again, that nature intended opposite sex interaction..
If other species partake in sex with the same sex then this is simply sexual pleasure and an example is your dog humping your leg or a rabbit humping a cover.. simply just sexual relief in any means possible!
SO I will say again, that nature intended opposite sex interaction..
Original post by Iknowbest
Nature is designed in a way to allow life to keep existing no matter how and it works extremely well hence the vast amount of life today! When it comes to animals then in the majority of cases nature requires male and females to mate, hence my conclusion of another reason being Nature.
If other species partake in sex with the same sex then this is simply sexual pleasure and an example is your dog humping your leg or a rabbit humping a cover.. simply just sexual relief in any means possible!
SO I will say again, that nature intended opposite sex interaction..
If other species partake in sex with the same sex then this is simply sexual pleasure and an example is your dog humping your leg or a rabbit humping a cover.. simply just sexual relief in any means possible!
SO I will say again, that nature intended opposite sex interaction..
Nature does not intend anything. Never did, never will. Intention implies the presence of an intelligent designer. I doubt anyone here is a creationist....
@epage I'd like to see where you're coming from but I dont see anything wrong with Milos views. They're perfectly reasonable. I DO NOT agree with Milo on a lot of things, but the problem is that we are literally in need of people like Milo to stand up against the PC cultural marxism that's eating up the west from within. It is literally the most dangerous movement since Fascism and Communism in the 30's and 40's.
Im sure we can agree on that?
Original post by Galaxie501
Nature does not intend anything. Never did, never will. Intention implies the presence of an intelligent designer. I doubt anyone here is a creationist....
@epage I'd like to see where you're coming from but I dont see anything wrong with Milos views. They're perfectly reasonable. I DO NOT agree with Milo on a lot of things, but the problem is that we are literally in need of people like Milo to stand up against the PC cultural marxism that's eating up the west from within. It is literally the most dangerous movement since Fascism and Communism in the 30's and 40's.
Im sure we can agree on that?
@epage I'd like to see where you're coming from but I dont see anything wrong with Milos views. They're perfectly reasonable. I DO NOT agree with Milo on a lot of things, but the problem is that we are literally in need of people like Milo to stand up against the PC cultural marxism that's eating up the west from within. It is literally the most dangerous movement since Fascism and Communism in the 30's and 40's.
Im sure we can agree on that?
I can agree that we do need a variety of conflicting opinions in society. Thats important. I also believe that people have the right to say what they want and censorship isn't okay if it is not abusing, hurting or targeting someone specifically. I do not believe that 'PC cultural marxism' is dangerous for society. It's important to have change and after hundreds years of capitalism and conservatism it is good to have other political beliefs in western society.
Original post by epage
I can agree that we do need a variety of conflicting opinions in society. Thats important. I also believe that people have the right to say what they want and censorship isn't okay if it is not abusing, hurting or targeting someone specifically. I do not believe that 'PC cultural marxism' is dangerous for society. It's important to have change and after hundreds years of capitalism and conservatism it is good to have other political beliefs in western society.
No doubt about that. The problem is just that one side actively sabotages free speech and discussion, crippling debate.
Hint: Its not the big bad mean conservatives this time.
PS: Europe hasnt seen real conservatism for over 70 years, so thats a thing of the past anyway.
Original post by OGGUS
Well the definition of sex... Let's say condoms weren't invented then...
still applies not all sex results in pregnancy and not all straight couples can conceive so further making the point irrelevant
Original post by BaconandSauce
still applies not all sex results in pregnancy and not all straight couples can conceive so further making the point irrelevant
Why you gotta be rude for... It's for people who want to have children. Like most women nowadays are nasty. They need help. There are nice ones out there obviously, my mother
. I'm defintely having children. And I think that people do have a right to have children.Furthermore, I have heard that some men want to have children without a surrogate, which I think is good, I have researched this topic indetail. Don't ask me for details I have exams.
But I liked your response. Thanks
Original post by Iknowbest
Nature is designed in a way to allow life to keep existing no matter how and it works extremely well hence the vast amount of life today! When it comes to animals then in the majority of cases nature requires male and females to mate, hence my conclusion of another reason being Nature.
If other species partake in sex with the same sex then this is simply sexual pleasure and an example is your dog humping your leg or a rabbit humping a cover.. simply just sexual relief in any means possible!
SO I will say again, that nature intended opposite sex interaction..
If other species partake in sex with the same sex then this is simply sexual pleasure and an example is your dog humping your leg or a rabbit humping a cover.. simply just sexual relief in any means possible!
SO I will say again, that nature intended opposite sex interaction..
Original post by Iknowbest
"Nature does not intend anything. Never did, never will. Intention implies the presence of an intelligent designer. I doubt anyone here is a creationist...."
Yes it does.. always has.. otherwise nothing would exist!
Yes it does.. always has.. otherwise nothing would exist!
Wow, you clearly know best, out of the two conflicting identities in your head, stupid #1 and stupid #2.
"Nature" is not designed; nature is just the tendencies of things without human interference or intervention.
Things that self-perpetuate / propagate tend to survive, while those that don't tend to die out, hence the status-quo.
Nature requires nothing.
It's only that a man ejaculating inside a woman's vagina greatly increases the chance of insemination, then reproduction. This would have taken a long time to reach this point, because of each mutation / mutations that offered a selective advantage occurs over time.
Sexual pleasure increases the chance of insemination & so reproduction, because it inclines you to have / seek out sex.
These are just selective advantages in natural selection.
Nature intended nothing, because nature has no intent / intentionality / purpose / design.
Intention requires sentience.
Nature has no sentience; it is tendencies.
Anyway why should nature have authority over your life? Nature can be as brutal as it can seem sweet. It's often ruthless, epitomising "survival of the fittest". It uses a scalpel against those less fortunate.
So stop idolising it.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ivybridge
No. Just, no. This does not even validate your ridiculous assertion.
writing silly labels and saying "no" doesn't make you right, it just makes your counter claim appear to be non-existent.
It does not matter, I suspect you and everyone knows the validity of the pain parents can feel when they know that they will not be grand parents.
Its bitter sweet because its parents who normally pay for the bulk of the wedding.
Paying for it would be like paying for no grand children to be "set in stone", it would not necessarily be the happy day for them that it would normally be.
Original post by FredOrJohn
writing silly labels and saying "no" doesn't make you right, it just makes your counter claim appear to be non-existent.
It does not matter, I suspect you and everyone knows the validity of the pain parents can feel when they know that they will not be grand parents.
Its bitter sweet because its parents who normally pay for the bulk of the wedding.
Paying for it would be like paying for no grand children to be "set in stone", it would not necessarily be the happy day for them that it would normally be.
It does not matter, I suspect you and everyone knows the validity of the pain parents can feel when they know that they will not be grand parents.
Its bitter sweet because its parents who normally pay for the bulk of the wedding.
Paying for it would be like paying for no grand children to be "set in stone", it would not necessarily be the happy day for them that it would normally be.
The fact you're trying to quantify this subjective and random scenario is funny.
Those parents are selfish idiots.
Original post by Galaxie501
Homosexuals should not adopt children in my view however UNLESS there are no other people volunteering for a adoption - simply due to the fact that children need a father and a mother.
(Come at me SJW's)
Homosexuals should not adopt children in my view however UNLESS there are no other people volunteering for a adoption - simply due to the fact that children need a father and a mother.
(Come at me SJW's)
Not necessarily. Children need two loving parents. So if two gay parents can provide for their adopted children emotionally and physically what is the problem?
Also, many people including me grew up in a single parent household.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
