if you read the post, you will see i said that it is a disease. clinging on the last hairs of your arguement
Natural selection conceived of as a struggle for life in which only those organisms best adapted to existing conditions are able to survive and reproduce.
So gays play no role in life.
YOU GUYS GOT OWNED!
__________________ "With reasonable people I will reason; with humane people I will plea; but to the arrogant I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments, for that is a waste of time"......................................
You have no argument. You're a whob or a wannabe whob.
Gay people are capable of reproduction and able to survive. You also only seem to have a problem with gay males. Which further indicates you're just some immature retard kid.
So being gay is unnatural!
That was my point to begin with!
You just proved my point!
__________________ "With reasonable people I will reason; with humane people I will plea; but to the arrogant I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments, for that is a waste of time"......................................
look at ur own statement again dimwit! organisms best adapted to EXISTING conditions. well existing conditions arent the jungle its the damn information age. the person most likely to survive is smart, open minded, cunning and steady. reproduction is more a COUNTER EVOLUTIONARY force these days seeing as the planet cant support the huge population. so infact people who DONT have children are doing the next generation a bigger favour in survival. THESE ARE THE "EXISTING CONDITIONS" deal with it! and also soon, natural death can easily be overcome and cloning can give children even to gays/ lesbians. so although they might not have been GENETICALLY perfect in the stone ages they are quite genetically good now, compareable to many others as the creation of technology is a much bigger investment in the future of mankind than the very slow evolution that came even with huge families. im assuming it IS the future of mankind ur referring to when mentioned survival of the FITTEST as leading upto that glorious point. as i said before the criteria of FIT has changed drastically large families have become IMPERFECT from the standpoint of human evolution. mankind and its self preservation instinct is the ultimate reality and all things if they EVOLVE should serve those two realities. if something evolves in a CLASSICAL way and is harmful to the future of mankind than that something has merely started mutating and NOT evolving since evolution is benefitial not harmful. i dont really expect all this to make it through that thick skull of urs but theres no harm in trying. simply put, THE CRITERIA FOR "PERFECTION" HAS CHANGED MY FRIEND.
Unnatural as in does not occur in nature, or unnatural as in does not occur without human intervention. If the former you're wrong, if the latter it does not indicate wrongness, nor are clothes or houses.
Every creature on this planet has sexual drive, it is natural.
If your genetics dont allow you to feel sexualy attracted to women, then that is unnatural. If sexual drive does not exist, there will not be life
Not having sexual drive towards woman is unnatural, admit it!
or you just have psychological problems.
so which one is it?
it is that simple
__________________ "With reasonable people I will reason; with humane people I will plea; but to the arrogant I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments, for that is a waste of time"......................................
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
That's not true, there is a disorder that makes people not have a sexual drive. Ever heard of asexuality? Homosexuals do have a sex drive...which is natural.
Then again, psychological problems are natural as well, so your point is invalid.
You're obviously not an authority on psychology, sociology or genetics, evolutionary or molecular, you're simply stating your inaccurate opinion as a fact. Add to that numerous logical fallacies, false dichotomy being the latest, and narcissism. You're a whob or an immature puerile homophobe (which really isn't an either/or anyway) we get it.
if you dont want to make babies, then you can still **** woman, not men. The point of sex is to have sexual drive towards women.
__________________ "With reasonable people I will reason; with humane people I will plea; but to the arrogant I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments, for that is a waste of time"......................................
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Nah, sexual drive is sexual drive. Reproduction only works between a man and a woman, but where you waste your sperm is hardly important (to an agnostic....you know, that'S what you aren't.)
Yes, YOU have sexual drive towards men, not women. There is no reason for that sexual drive to develope. It is a mistake, and if you dont admit that, then you must admit that you have a psychological disorder.
__________________ "With reasonable people I will reason; with humane people I will plea; but to the arrogant I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments, for that is a waste of time"......................................
animal rape is wrong, right?
A mans penis does not belong in a animal, just as a mans penis does not belong in a man.
Sexual acts belong to women, thats why men dont have vaginas.
Thats why woman can produce babies, not men.
Sex with men is not intended in nature, why do you think nature is like this?
__________________ "With reasonable people I will reason; with humane people I will plea; but to the arrogant I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments, for that is a waste of time"......................................
If i believe that when you die, you cease to exist, you have no conciousness.
Now why would i be a a religious person?
__________________ "With reasonable people I will reason; with humane people I will plea; but to the arrogant I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments, for that is a waste of time"......................................
KMC Community Forums
Jul 22nd, 2006 05:26 PM
