Our bodies are "intended" (insofar as evolution "intends" anything) for survival and reproduction. Thanks to our minds, we use our bodies for a lot more than that. Our bodies weren't "intended" for sports, they weren't "intended" for art--if you disapprove of using bodies for "unintended" things, you'll be ruling out a lot of stuff--pretty much everything that makes life worth living. And you clearly don't disapprove of sports, or else you wouldn't be a Blazers fan and on this forum. So why do you draw the line at homosexuality when you're perfectly happy with other "unintended" uses of the body?
Alright, lemme use some examples of things that happen that would be similar to gay people breeding with the opposite sex. 1. Cannibalism, I and 99.999999 percent of the population have no desire to eat another person. Yet, people in extreme situations have done so to survive. 2. Straight men given life in prison will perform homosexual acts. So somehow if everyone on Earth turned gay tomorrow I'm to assume human life would end within 100 years or so without science. It just doesn't make sense. Hell, I could argue that it would be a blessing to an overpopulated Earth where people live in poverty and die of starvation. Every pregnancy would be planned, abortions would almost completely end. Dammit I've been converted. Everyone go gay starting........NOW. Wait, you're straight and don't wanna change? Why expect gay people to change? Checkmate.
It's not just that, but if someone really wants to only look at biological aspects, we as a human species are no different than any other species. Any Biologist will attest to seeing individuals in any species group that don't seem to fit with general procreation. I study endangered shorebirds and sometimes there are males and females that show "breeding behavior", but end up hanging out with those of their own sex. It is confusing for a Biologist I suppose, but, it is also natural. Of course evolutionary, a penis and vagina were evolved for a certain function, and there is no debating that, but, there are individuals in any group of any animal ever studied that naturally go the opposite way. There are gay turtles, birds, lions, fish, bears, and even insects out there. Anything you can think of. What makes humans different? It is also part of nature. It is going to happen. You can either accept that it is a natural part of existence as a species, or fight against it. What is the purpose at that point, aside from discrediting those who's natural biology goes against your personal disposition? You are straight, others are gay. Who cares? It's not going to destroy humanity or hurt our species' production. It is a part of nature.
This made me laugh so hard. Apparently there are people who want everyone to, as he so eloquently puts it, "evolve into a homosexual life"
Well, I was talking about the human population as a whole. I don't think Catholicism (especially of the priestly variety) is growing quite that rapidly.
Okay. I honestly thought that you were advocating that a woman can have sex with a woman and reproduce, without the help of a man. I have been saying without the help of a man all along. NOW you are saying that the gay couple needs to use a third party. You coulda said so from the get go? Was I not clear on a man having sex with a man and reproducing without outside influence? Ugh... pounding my head against the wall on this one... Sure... Checkmate...
Simple. Because sports have no bearing on the reproduction and whether a child should be raised with one of each sex or can be raised with both of one sex. However, I don't really draw the line at anything. I am flexible as I learn and grow and I hope to always remain that way. With that said, my current stance is we are created in a manner that to me is obvious that a man is meant for a woman and vice versa for reproductive and family purposes as a child spends the first quarter of their lives growing and learning from their parents. Yes the mind has evolved and created the ability to cut corners in many facets of life. Doesn't mean it was the best for us as individuals or a society. Do I think Homosexuality will take over the world? NO. Do I believe homosexuals should be able to live as everyone else? Yes. Do I agree that science creating the ability to manipulate genes and provide an unnatural evolution or expedition is a good thing for the human race? no. Do I think its a bad thing? No. Do I think its debatable? Hell Yes I do. Why? Because in our current physical form, to me, it (again) seems obvious how we were meant to come together for reproductive purposes. I do have a conflict on whether a gay couple should be allowed to raise a child. Only because a part of me feels like it isn't right to deprive a child both sexes as a role model and mentor. Would I ever vote to take this right away? Hell no. Because I understand that my opinion is just that. My opinion. Its not based on facts, Its based on how I perceive the best opportunity for a child to be raised is and that's with a parent from each side. With that said, I know a couple and fully believe the two of them would be able to raise a child and provide and nurture and love that child every built as much as a couple of opposite sex would. I guess, I just keep getting hung up on the fact that the child was not created by the parents and thus, it doesn't seem natural. I don't feel or believe this based on any type of religious background or upbringing, for I had none. I was raised by divorced parents moving back and forth from one to the other, but mostly by my mother. Please don't crucify me for my opinion, as I have also tried to make it clear that I mean no harm or disrespect to anyone and am not trying to judge or belittle anyone.
So you have no problem with homosexuals, but have a problem with them actually having sex, since it doesn't lead to reproduction. Do you realize how dumb this sounds? Like I mentioned earlier, homosexuality exists in every species of animal that has ever been studied. Do you not use protection every time you have sex and have the girl raise her knees above her head after sex to help the flow of sperm? If not, you are not helping the human race populate, which is apparently something you care about.
It sounds dumb when you twist what I said. I never said I had a problem with them having sex, or meant to. Maybe not the best choice of word of "Procreation" and I'm used to not having to worry about choosing my words wisely, as I am usually jovial on here and have no deep intent or serious intent. I apologize. We all have instincts we want to satisfy. IF you noticed in my post you quoted, that I was more so speaking about having and raising children? Not actually satisfying sexual desires?
I knew that is what you meant the whole time. I was fucking with you because as you now know I said the opposite.
I believe felons should be entitled to vote. The NBA should boycott all states that ban voting rights for felons. Everyone who disagrees with me is an ignorant bigot who doesn't believe in equal rights. I do believe there are far more felons than trans-individuals, so you are also an ignorant bigot for not being more outraged against the revocation of voting rights for felons over the rights of transgenders to use bathrooms. I am speaking the truth.
So you are equating transgendered people (who are born a certain way biologically) to felons (who have become that way out of their own volition). Good luck to you sir.
Homeless people. Don't get me started on homeless people. Any state that has a ban on homeless people sleeping in public is not a state I want the NBA to associate with. There are more homeless people than transgenders so you are an ignorant bigot for not holding the rights of homeless people to actuate living more sacred than the rights of transgenders to use bathrooms.
Oh, a free will-determinism argument brewing. Nice assumption! I take it you are totally against BLM because blacks are inherently violent and felonious and reap what they sow. Edit: this is just banter
