Originally posted by whobdamandog
Anyway..I think you've missed the whole ball on the "procreation" argument. You can stick tons of things up the vagina, but guess what..if those things don't allow for the possibility of procreation..then the act of vaginal intercourse being performed is not a "natural one"...duhh...🙄
Any type of sexual behavior that does allow the possibility of a child is "biologically unnatural" and thus homosexual? This does not make a heap of sense. Millions of people in the world use condoms or contraceptives. Many of them nullify any chance for the possibility of a child. Many elderly people have sex even though their reproductive systems are long since dead. Many heterosexual people choose to have sex anally or orally. Which also nullifies any chance of a child. A woman whose had her ovaries tied or a man whose had a vasectomy. If a man masturbates a woman or vice versa. If what you say is true, that persons who participate in "biologically unnatural" sexual behavior is homosexual than the homosexual population should skyrocket.
It simply doesn't make sense. Most people do not participate in by your definition strictly vaginal intercourse with the possibility of procreation exclusively or at all. A gay man in a faux marriage who has sex with a woman vaginally is no longer a homosexual? A lesbian in a faux who has sex with a man vaginally is no longer a homosexual? A heterosexual man who has anal sex with a man in prison is no longer a heterosexual? A female who experiments with her best friend vaginally is a lesbian? If sexual behavior is what truly defines sexual orientation, than most people who have experienced both spectrum of sexual behavior is not homosexual nor heterosexual but bisexual. A married gay man who regularly has sex with his wife to keep himself in the closet but goes to gay clubs to have sex with men is not a homosexual by your definition. He must be...bisexual maybe? A straight female porn star who participates in a great range of "biologically unnatural" sexual behavior is not a heterosexual but a homosexual...because she participates and chooses to do "biologically unnatural" sexual behavior? There are so many examples that just don't add up to your theory.
Originally posted by whobdamandog
Yeah and according to wiki..that "many" wouldn't include 80% percent of the homosexual population...🙄
80% of the male populations. 50% lesbian + 20% gays = 70%. So yeah, most don't. By this is just going on your source. And according to your definition apparently anyone who uses birth control or oral sex must also be homosexual too...
Originally posted by whobdamandog
you just get more absurd with these posts Draco..the key word in the sentence above is "sexual"...refer back to the definition of "sexual" above to see how illogical your opinion is.
You cannot be attracted sexual behavior. It is an act. It fully requires on WHOM is doing the said sexual behavior. Many homosexual men get off on straight men having sex with women vaginally. Many heterosexual men get off on having anal sex with their wives. It depends on the whom. Would you be "attracted' to the sexual behavior of Michael Jackson having sex with Joan Rivers. You're straight. You're "attracted" to vaginal intercourse. Soooo, I'm guessing that's a yes?
Originally posted by whobdamandog
You must have not read a whole lot of my posts..I've actually addressed the absurdity of women calling themselves lesbians, and then engaging in sex with women who look like men, using plastic replicas of the penis.
Again..if lesbians are attracted only to women..what's with all the dildo toys and many of them dressing up/acting like men.[/B][/QUOTE]
It's actually a cultural thing. And they're not alone in this aspect. Many African societies have the butchest, masculine acting women you'll ever met...but they're still straight and men are still attracted to them.
And it's a stereotype anyway. You cannot tell a homosexual from heterosexual unless A) they tell you or B) they choose to act in the stereotypical manner that degrades them all much like blacks acting like rappers and hos' or Latinos acting like gangbangers' or JLO wannabes. Are 50 Cent or Missy Elliot a accurate perception of blacks really are? No. Neither is Ellen or Rosie for lesbians. If you actually got into the real world and actually met a few lesbians, you'd see that most are just...women. They act like women, they look like women, and you wouldn't be able to tell they're lesbians unless they wore something (i.e. a rainbow flag) or they told you or you have really good gaydar. I met a lesbian who looked and acted like Jessica Simpson. I thought she would marry a Brett Favre. Lo and behold she turned out to be a lesbian who was dating a shy Pakistani girl.
I'm extremely surprised you fall for homosexual stereotypes, let alone any stereotype at all.
Originally posted by whobdamandog
Sigh..Yet another "intelligent" individual who has failed with their argument..but what the hey..once again, I've managed to get another good laugh..😆
Once again, there is a difference between opinion and sheer degradation of another's opinion. You once said on another thread "what happened to differences in opinions?" What happened indeed. You claim to represent the conservative right (though I disagree as much as Ann Coulter representing the opinions of right-wing conservatives) but you're not getting them through. Why? Sarcasm, insults, more sarcasm, degradation of another's personality, intelligence or background, more insults and general bullying. You're being an *******. This is not an insult. It's a fact. You probably out of warped pride would acknowledge this fact. But if you truly (and I think you do because you spend a tremendous amount of time, research and development in your posts) want people to acknowledge the validity of your arguements, respect your opinions, and remain a viable contestant for the conservative side in an overwhelmingly liberal forum, then you must do it rationally without the insults, or the puns to insults or any type of degradation. Why does a great many of people seem to detest you? It has nothing to do with your opinion being opposite to theirs? It has to do with your sheer lack of respect for theirs and your need to establish your intellectual or moral superiority to them. Most people stop to debate with you anymore. Most just insult you like you've insulted them. Does it strike you odd that four moderators would go out of their way to show their disdain for you? Does it strike you odd that you don't seem to possess a single supporter or compatriot for what you have to say? And it has nothing to do with difference of opinion. It has solely do to with difference of manners and respect. You're a smart guy. And I completely agree we need a conservative voice (KidRock does not count) on this forum. But you're not getting your ideas through. Would you accept a stone if someone throws it you? Or would you accept it if someone gives it to you? You're just establishing their negative views on conservatives. That they are arrogant. That they are degrading. And they are just plain mean.
I hope this does something to change your forum behavior. If not, hey I tried.