Sodemy/Homosexuality - natural or not Watch

Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#421
Report 8 years ago
#421
(Original post by Diaz89)
What is of natural human interaction.



Your idea of absolute liberty and self detrmination, that no one "impose their ideas on others" hence, if we go by your belief we should disregard innumerable things that are imposed on us by others and so in essence you're advocating anarchy.




Well for instance everytime the issue of gay marriage has been put to the vote in America, it has been rejected every single time, even in California which is regarded as the most liberal state in the US, it is clear that it isn't a view held be me but nearly every single human being.

Individuals should act in an ordinary civilized manner, because they don't harm others it doesn't make it right. If I ate my own feces, I would not be harming anyone, but i'd be considered as a mentally deranged individual.



It's not rhetoric, it's fact, you believe that depraved, barbaric behaviour should fester in our society which culminated to the fact that you would go so far as to put a case for and justify incest which s frankly embarrassing.
I hear ya'.

For this thread to have gone on for so long, for the 'natural' point to have been explained to your numerous times and for you to use it as your opening point is cringe-worthy.

Simply put: you seek to undermine liberty to shape the world into your view of what is right. Do bleat on about how this is going to subvert out morals or something now.
reply
edanon
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#422
Report 8 years ago
#422
Firstly, natural doesn't really mean anything. There is no opposite to "natural". What happens, happens because it is natural. We are animals... the city is our nest and roads are our forest path. Nature has no correlation with morality or human moral systems. Nature includes natural disasters and terminal illness... it has nothing to do with any goal. Nature does not have rules and so things like reproduction or food chains are not something "fixed" as extinction is also a part of nature.

So when we appeal to what is "natural" i think we tend to really mean what is "right". What is "right" is to do with human morality and so any appeals to animals and nature cannot be used to justify or condemn something like homosexuality.

So now it simply comes down to personal morality. If your religion tells you that homosexuality is wrong and you stick to your religion then it is not a question of personal choice.. you have let your religion decide. Then it comes down to a religious debate not a moral debate in which you'd have to first agree on whether God exists or not.

If you don't believe in God then morality pretty much has to be subjective. It then comes down to popular morality which is dictated by emotions and generally includes the "harm principle".

So based upon the harm principle, because homosexuality does not harm anyone else (and depending on your views, the homosexuals themselves), homosexuality is absolutely fine.

Once again though, "natural" holds no moral value.
0
reply
Aquariumnerd
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#423
Report 8 years ago
#423
(Original post by howdypartner21)
Right,

I got in a debate with a gay friend of mine. He ASKED me what I thought of homosexuality (I have known him for years and never said anything about it before, because he never asked), but because he asked, I replied respectfully, but honestly and he hasnt spoken to me in months despite my numerous texts.

i basically said the following things, while always listening to when he would reply:

I think homosexuality is wrong. I never understood it, one of my friends summarised his opinion on sodemy:

"we have 'in' holes (mouth) and 'out' holes (anus) and we shouldnt get them mixed up. Why put something into a place where excrement comes out of" and also "god made adam and Eve, not adam and Steve", which is true. Which is why most gays are not religious, because most religions are against homosexuality.

I completely agree with my friends statements. Human waste comes out of the anus, and sodemites are sticking their penis into their. (BTW I think anal penetration of girls is just as disgusting and un natural). I have nothing against gay people, hence why I am trying to re-contact my friend. But if asked, be prepared for the truth. There is nothing natural about it and homosexuality imo is wrong. Also, if a gay couple amrried and adopted, that child is going to probably sway to feeling gay, and he defo wont have a normal childhood.

I was given the argument that we have receptors in our anus and therefore its only logical that we enjoy stuff getting put in our anus, which acually sickens me. Its not even an argument. I am sure we do have reseptors there, doesnt mean people should insert something up their!

I think that whenever someone says they dont think sodemy is natural or right, they are labeled homophobic, i have nothing against sodomites, they can do what they want i am more than happy with that, but I do not think its right and I do not think its natural and i think there is nothing wrong in saying that at all.

I was thinking about it more and a lot of my gay friends are either loners and/or over think things way to much and so I think that there reason for having no friends is because they are different (gay) or they thoughtt hemselves to believe that, because when he was on the bus saw another guy on the bus or somethign and therefore that person is gay (they analyse things way to much).

Another point I mentioned to him is that "gay" means happy and it was stolen to be used for Sodemy, to make it seem more normal, but there is nothing naturl about sodemy. It is even definined as "unnatural" sex

This is to be a constructive thread, no disrespect to anyone.

There is nothing wrong with me saying that i think sodemy (homosexuality) is wrong and unnatural, its freedom of speech.

Thoughts....

Keep it clean so moderators wont delete this freedom of speech and constructive debate
no, the way I see it it isn’t. This is because men who are truly gay would not go with a women to get her pregnant. The fact that only women can get pregnant would mean that men who do not go with a women would not get her pregnant and so would not pass on their variations to the next generation ‘natural selection’. Only women get pregnant, this is the selective pressure.
Men who are bisexual might still pass on their variations to then next generation though :\, but its still less likely.
I would have thought that its acaually mainly hormonal and to do with your whole bodys biochemistry, as well as partially your upbringing that determines your sexual arousals and interests. So based on this I would have thought that the genes that produce the proteins and give you the kind of hormonal balance in your blood that could make you more likely to fancy men would not be passed on because as I said you would not breed and pass on your variations if you where a gay man. Somthing like that lol.:yep:
0
reply
Rossical
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#424
Report 8 years ago
#424
i love how guys only ever seem to have issues with gay men.
Lesbians are just fine!, nothing unnatural about that huh?
0
reply
superfoggy
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#425
Report 8 years ago
#425
(Original post by howdypartner21)
There is nothing wrong with me saying that i think sodemy (homosexuality) is wrong and unnatural, its freedom of speech.
Even if you have the right to express your opinion, it doesn't stop you being wrong. Which you are.
0
reply
Don John
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#426
Report 8 years ago
#426
(Original post by howdypartner21)
Right,

I got in a debate with a gay friend of mine. He ASKED me what I thought of homosexuality (I have known him for years and never said anything about it before, because he never asked), but because he asked, I replied respectfully, but honestly and he hasnt spoken to me in months despite my numerous texts.

i basically said the following things, while always listening to when he would reply:

I think homosexuality is wrong. I never understood it, one of my friends summarised his opinion on sodemy:

"we have 'in' holes (mouth) and 'out' holes (anus) and we shouldnt get them mixed up. Why put something into a place where excrement comes out of" and also "god made adam and Eve, not adam and Steve", which is true. Which is why most gays are not religious, because most religions are against homosexuality.

I completely agree with my friends statements. Human waste comes out of the anus, and sodemites are sticking their penis into their. (BTW I think anal penetration of girls is just as disgusting and un natural). I have nothing against gay people, hence why I am trying to re-contact my friend. But if asked, be prepared for the truth. There is nothing natural about it and homosexuality imo is wrong. Also, if a gay couple amrried and adopted, that child is going to probably sway to feeling gay, and he defo wont have a normal childhood.

I was given the argument that we have receptors in our anus and therefore its only logical that we enjoy stuff getting put in our anus, which acually sickens me. Its not even an argument. I am sure we do have reseptors there, doesnt mean people should insert something up their!

I think that whenever someone says they dont think sodemy is natural or right, they are labeled homophobic, i have nothing against sodomites, they can do what they want i am more than happy with that, but I do not think its right and I do not think its natural and i think there is nothing wrong in saying that at all.

I was thinking about it more and a lot of my gay friends are either loners and/or over think things way to much and so I think that there reason for having no friends is because they are different (gay) or they thoughtt hemselves to believe that, because when he was on the bus saw another guy on the bus or somethign and therefore that person is gay (they analyse things way to much).

Another point I mentioned to him is that "gay" means happy and it was stolen to be used for Sodemy, to make it seem more normal, but there is nothing naturl about sodemy. It is even definined as "unnatural" sex

This is to be a constructive thread, no disrespect to anyone.

There is nothing wrong with me saying that i think sodemy (homosexuality) is wrong and unnatural, its freedom of speech.

Thoughts....

Keep it clean so moderators wont delete this freedom of speech and constructive debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NG7i4...os=fihJfCWylvs
0
reply
Turin Turambar
Badges: 0
#427
Report 8 years ago
#427
There is nothing inherently wrong with homosexual sex, two people can do whatever they want, no matter how freaky it is - and with no reprecussions.

However, homosexuality is put forward as a sexual orientation rather than an act that two people engage in. Humans are naturally bisexual, sexual preferences being formed by experience - it is a learned (verb) behavior. We are attracted to physical qualities such as colour, texture and form - not gender. We can also develop feelings for more abstract concepts such as personality or temprement. Homosexuals tend to confuse their attraction to physical qualities with love for the non-physical qualities. As such, I see homosexual "relationships" as two friends who through their mutual desire for sexual gratification have come to regard their otherwise normal relationship as a romantic one.

For I believe that between man and woman is the urge to procreate which comes from a deep genetic level. So man and woman seek out the qualities that they find appealing in order to have a good offspring and carry on the genes. A heterosexual relationship is to satisfy inherent natural urges that are neccessary to perpetuate ones genes. In satisfying these urges we find a more powerful form of "love" than is available to those who pursue homosexual relationships exclusively.

So you see, homosexuality is merely an act whereas heterosexuality is a creative act that comes from an inherent desire.

Homosexuality is no different from masturbation.

The problem arises when sexuality is marketed as a solid concept. Men who up until a certain point led normal heterosexual lives as masculine men have suddenly became enchanted by the idea that they are homosexual and turned effeminate, changing their whole personality and beheviour.

Through media and social manipulation these masturbators begin to build a separate and unnatural identity for themselves. This identity is psychologicaly a delusion. It causes them to act in harmful ways. They end up with a sort of neurosis about their position in society. Thus we see people setting up these "pride campaigns" in order to give themselves meaning. They create animosity in order to have something to fight against, if they have a cause they have a purpose and so a place in society.

Homosexuality is no different from masturbation because it is merely an act, albeit an act that involves another person/s. Homosexuality is an act that fulfils a personal erotic desire - like masturbation - whereas heterosexuality is a creative act that fulfils the inherent desire to reproduce. Heterosexual sex, while fulfilling an erotic desire also fulfills an inherent desire to procreate and has a creative outcome, unlike masturbation.

I am niether promoting homosexuality or condemning it, but you will notice that I hold heterosexuality up as a norm and a positive, creative act. The purpose of my arguement is to remove the needless hysteria (both pro and anti) about homosexuality.

I believe the "gay identity" is a negative thing, especialy for those who identify as homosexual and for those whom they choose to agitate.
0
reply
A Lesson to Learn..
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#428
Report 8 years ago
#428
What a load of absolute ********! How is being gay 'wrong' in any way?! to love is natural, why does it even matter who you are attracted to? stop being such a homophobe!!
0
reply
Planto
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#429
Report 8 years ago
#429
(Original post by Turin Turambar)
There is nothing inherently wrong with homosexual sex, two people can do whatever they want, no matter how freaky it is - and with no reprecussions.

However, homosexuality is put forward as a sexual orientation rather than an act that two people engage in. Humans are naturally bisexual, sexual preferences being formed by experience - it is a learned (verb) behavior
Good job basing a long post on one ridiculous, invented premise.

:borat:
0
reply
edanon
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#430
Report 8 years ago
#430
(Original post by Turin Turambar)
For I believe that between man and woman is the urge to procreate which comes from a deep genetic level. So man and woman seek out the qualities that they find appealing in order to have a good offspring and carry on the genes. A heterosexual relationship is to satisfy inherent natural urges that are neccessary to perpetuate ones genes. In satisfying these urges we find a more powerful form of "love" than is available to those who pursue homosexual relationships exclusively.
I really agree with a lot of what you said, which is rare for me on here so

However, i don't think that there is anything inherent in us that will naturally know the difference between having a loving relationship with a result of reproduction and having a loving relationship without the result of reproduction.

Like you said, we are atracted to texture, colour and form... not gender. So if, in mind and emotion, there is no difference between a hetero or homo relationship, then the only inherent "desire" left to fulfill is sex.... and both hetero and homo relationships fulfill this too.

The natural "inherent" desires (if there are any) will all be fulfilled in both relationships because, as you said, gender is not something we inherently distinguish between.

So i think that both relationships are capable of the same amount of "love".

But great post none the less.
0
reply
Turin Turambar
Badges: 0
#431
Report 8 years ago
#431
(Original post by Planto)
Good job basing a long post on one ridiculous, invented premise.

:borat:
Ridiculous, invented premise?
0
reply
Planto
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#432
Report 8 years ago
#432
(Original post by Turin Turambar)
Ridiculous, invented premise?
Yes. Claiming that sexuality is entirely learned and not biological or genetic is a massive, baseless assumption, contrary both to sense and evidence.
0
reply
The Fourh Man
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#433
Report 8 years ago
#433
Moot point. So long as it is consensual it is the business of nobody but the participants (unless they're making a lot of noise and disturbing the neighbours, same goes for hetros).
0
reply
edanon
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#434
Report 8 years ago
#434
(Original post by Planto)
Yes. Claiming that sexuality is entirely learned and not biological or genetic is a massive, baseless assumption, contrary both to sense and evidence.
How can the body inherently tell the difference between a gender? The mind learns what gender is, how to aproach it and the differences between both.

Obviously there is nothing inherent that would register a "female" or "male" in our minds naturally. How would it know the difference between a 21st century hipster man and an 18th century woman. How would it tell the difference between a slim woman with a flat chest and a fat man with man-boobs?

Atraction for that reason is bi-sexual. If a man was dressed convinsingly as a woman then a hetero man could be atracted to her.
0
reply
Turin Turambar
Badges: 0
#435
Report 8 years ago
#435
(Original post by Planto)
Yes. Claiming that sexuality is entirely learned and not biological or genetic is a massive, baseless assumption, contrary both to sense and evidence.
You got some evidence to disprove this?

Innate bisexuality (or predisposition to bisexuality) is a term introduced by Sigmund Freud (based on work by his associate Wilhelm Fliess), that expounds all humans are born bisexual but through psychological development (which includes both external and internal factors) become monosexual while the bisexuality remains in a latent state.

The conclusions that he draws are based on the fact that at early stages of development, humans undergo a period of hermaphrodism. Based on this, he asserts that, "the conception which we gather from this long known anatomical fact is the original predisposition to bisexuality, which in the course of development has changed to monosexuality, leaving slight remnants of the stunted sex."

This develops into a general theory that attraction to both sexes is possible, but that one is more common for each sex. He explains the inversion of homosexual attraction as the result of a traumatic episode or episodes that prevent the normal development of an attraction for the opposite sex.


Freud famously characterized humans as naturally "polymorphously perverse," meaning either that practically any object can be a source of erotic fulfillment, or that babies are relatively indifferent to the object of erotic fulfillment.
0
reply
speedbird
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#436
Report 8 years ago
#436
(Original post by Turin Turambar)
Humans are naturally bisexual
This is a myth. There is no proof for it. Sexual orientation though ranges along a continuum, and cannot be changed.

(Original post by Turin Turambar)
Homosexuals tend to confuse their attraction to physical qualities with love for the non-physical qualities. As such, I see homosexual "relationships" as two friends who through their mutual desire for sexual gratification have come to regard their otherwise normal relationship as a romantic one. So you see, homosexuality is merely an act whereas heterosexuality is a creative act that comes from an inherent desire. (...) Homosexuality is no different from masturbation.
You're wrong. On the contrary, "sexual orientation is closely tied to the intimate personal relationships that meet deeply felt needs for love, attachment, and intimacy. In addition to sexual behaviors, these bonds include nonsexual physical affection between partners, shared goals and values, mutual support, and ongoing commitment." (Source: American Psychological Association)

(Original post by Turin Turambar)
Thus we see people setting up these "pride campaigns" in order to give themselves meaning. They create animosity in order to have something to fight against, if they have a cause they have a purpose and so a place in society.
No. Don't be a smartarse. The main aim of pride campaigns, in spite of their using the term 'pride' which is used in this case as an antonym for shame, is to raise awareness of LGBT issues and to demonstrate against discrimination. A pride parade is no more of a party than a flight attendant is a waiter/waitress.
0
reply
Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#437
Report 8 years ago
#437
(Original post by Turin Turambar)
You got some evidence to disprove this?
Humongous lol at citing Freud's theory of psychosexual development as hard evidence.
reply
Seanisonfire
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#438
Report 8 years ago
#438
We have come to strange point in society where natural automatically equals good. Go and **** in a forest and see if that's true.
0
reply
Seanisonfire
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#439
Report 8 years ago
#439
Also I find it strange when people try and quantify human sexuality. Can you explain humanity? No so stop trying and just enjoy the ride.
0
reply
Spanishdream
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#440
Report 8 years ago
#440
There's a lot of truth in the OP post. It is unnatural and the straightest of straights (such as myself) find it hard to understand why someone would find pleasure in sticking it up there, so to speak.
Things are supposed to come out, not go in. I completely understand that statement.

However, to suggest it's wrong is, well, wrong. Homosexuality is just, some what of a mutation from normality. Individuality you could possibly argue in someway. Don't paint gays as sub humans.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (1583)
79.31%
Leave (413)
20.69%

Watched Threads

View All