Sorry if it was taken that way I never thought of the stuff you added that is why I ended my paragraph with this "look foward to STIMULATING discussion please no spamming me with hatred." because I did want honest views. You are right about how we keep people alive far longer than they are ment to live. In fact I wish now a days was more like ancient times. Thousands of years ago there was less disease, as well as worse ones but anyway some records even claimed people to live to be hundreds of years old. Whether or not thats true or not. I do refuse to keep posting in here since I can already tell the topic is way to touchy.

ONCE AGAIN I DIDN'T MEAN ANY OF IT IN A BAD WAY. I was just posting something i've always though about and wanted some resonse to it.

__________________
-One does not simply hookshot into Mordor!
nor does one simply TriforceSlash into Mordor!...
One may not keyblade into Mordor either!
...
However, one may pull the sword out of the pedestal fo time to enter Mordor!

-May the Triforce be with you!

The population cannot die out for the reason you stated. There will be human life as long as eggs and sperm exist and as long as people are willing to buy and sell them. Simple as that. Doesn't matter who's gay or who isn't. That's not going to stop anyone.

It indeed is a touchy subject, you're completely right about that. It's easier to react to such kind of posts than it is to place an initial one.

No sweats mate, I was just pointing out to you what I read. If I came over overdefensively or offended, I'm sorry.

__________________

Evil pig-man lover.
Slash is nice
but what you say is generally logical and can be proven through reason. That usually makes it the truth, at least in my book.
The only real time you re-read two posts is if their really funny or their by Slash or HylianHitman

The main flaw in your evolution argument is the assumption that there's a point to it. There's no 'wrong' or 'right' when it comes to evolution. Species don't adapt because they have to, only the species that accidentally adapted will survive and the others won't. There's no point to it.
So it's not like two gay guys/girls could decide "well we should be able to reproduce, but we can't, well let's make a baby the regular way first and make it have the ability to have same-sex reproduction". First of all it would take multiple generations, and second of all...I don't really see it happening

__________________

I might have forgotten to mention that not only are we talking about a different time, we're also talking about a different place. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the events in the Bible take place in the Middle East.

__________________


I'm good at N, and N+.

Like what I just wrote? Add to my Reputation!

N: Inadvertently Homicidal Robots, Evasive Ninjas and A Whole Whack of Style

What a stupid thing to say.

That would never happen anyway, and what would be preventing men and women from having sex to repopulate the earth, or men donating sperm and women having it artificially inseminated?

__________________

blog, innit - rainha xuxa - 'the wang' - paula abdul's urine sample

Awesome point there,:}
I don't like stupid people...At all.
Btw,People here might really get there knickers in a knot if they knew my best friend,She likes guys one minute and then likes girls the next...Hehe :}

__________________

My Youtube Channel
Send me a friend request on Youtube,
I enjoy getting new friends.
Also,
if you'd like a signature,PM me.
Voober, I'm Cheesie on there.

Formerly known as Twilight Wolf on Zelda Gamers.

Okay, I have been directed here by Desi when we were discussing homosexuality, and after (finally) reading 22 pages of this discussion, I have come to the point of reading every statement that has been made here. Some things have appalled me, but most things have not, (not even the homophobia, we get that everywhere).

Anyway, you may all know by now, but I am also a homosexual. Being a very philosophical and hypothetical person, who often theorizes things that puzzle until I come up with a solution that I am satisfied with, I have created many theories to which, I consider very accurate. Something that angered me, no offence to the person who said this, was because they blatantly stated something without giving thought to other possible solutions, and by this eradicating any other possibilities, and whilst I won't hold anything against you for it, this offended me a little.

Okay, now for my theories on homosexuality. A few people sometimes bring the animal argument into homosexuality. "How can homosexuality be natural when animals are also God's creations, yet they are all straight?" To this, I'd like to say 'Wrong'. There have been animals that are bisexual, but more to the point, animal's brains are not as complexly developed as our own. Their drive is more on instinct, such as assemble food for the colony... reproduce with the queen... survival 101... etc. Animals experiences just help, for example, something bad happens once, they'll refrain from doing it again, the electric muffin experiment. But humans evolved past the instinct point, and everybody is different. Humans interpret experiences into emotions in the same unique way as a fingerprint. Because of this, people have different desires and cravings, and to some of you, (this also angered me a little), who completely gave it to the point of gay SEX, mostly it's a physical and emotional desire, not a sexual one! I do not consider sex yet, I'm a complete virgin, and all I think about in a guy is somebody whose personality I like, somebody who I'm not embarrassed to spend time with, and somebody who will love me for who I am. Is this too far from the heterosexual example? I think not.

Also, the theory I hold on homosexuality, you may or may not approve of it, and I am not going to imply that any of you will become homosexuals. No-one is born as a homosexual. We are all born with an ability to become homosexual. Although, this does not occur for most people. It requires a trigger, and that trigger differs for each person, it could just become a realization one morning that you don't like the opposite gender, or in my personal experience, it was a heavy debate in my head for a lengthy time, until I myself was ready to admit who I was, and who I liked. At one point, I considered myself bisexual, because I thought it sounded better, and I wanted to have a kid in the future, being the heir to both families (the sole male of both families in my line). But eventually after accepting bisexuality, you venture more into the topic, and I discovered I was a homosexual. I have been asked before, "If you could be straight and avoid the prejudice and homophobic comments, would you?" This is an interesting question, and the response differs from person to person. My answer is, "No, I wouldn't." I am completely happy with who I am, and the emotional desire to be with a guy makes me happier than anything, and I would not be straight for the world. It's not going to be any different to what somebody thinks of me just because of my sexual preference, I'm oblivious to what others think (badly) of me anyway.

I'd also like to thank that Roulette person (sorry, I forgot your name), for providing many statements and rhetorical questions that indeed justify the point of the argument of homosexuality and homophobia. (Notice I'm not using the word "religion", for there are religious people who totally accept gays, and there are non-religious people who loathe gays with a passion. I do not discriminate on religion, I have my own philosophical views on death and religion, and I guess the only way to find out who was right or wrong will be in 70 years when we're all dead.)

Anyway, I seem to have forgotten some of the arguments presented in the 22 page debate, and because this is the first day back from the holidays, my brain is fairly dead, so if there are any important things I have not answered, I believe I can answer them and give an answer you might at least find respectable, so if there is a flaw or hole in my theories or answers, please, just PM me and I'll re-post in here something, or if I can't reply to it, and I think it's a great argument, I'll post it in here and we'll try to debate to that point, for this is a debate.

A response to Ventriloquist:

I thank you for stating your views without naming all of the various specific individual things that were said in this thread (and the various individuals that said them) that might have offended you. I think you handled the issue very nicely.

__________________
~~Keep it Reel~~

Apologies if things I've said have already been covered but I haven't read everything. I'm going to give a general overview of the arguments against homosexuality I have heard and discuss them.

Ok, most people who are against homosexuality are so for religious reasons and yes, it's pretty hard to get away from that notorious Old Testament verse without some pretty dodgy 'it's a metaphor' work and some pretty skillage twisting of words. The fact of the matter is that it's there clear as day, and not just the act is condemed, the perpretrators, homosexuals, are instructed to be punished rather severely as well. A lot of people however, religious or otherwise, have a somewhat more sophisticated grasp of morals and know it is better not to hate so freely. So, many people are either oblivious to the passage, pretend that they are, dismiss it as a metaphor (again, some serious twistage and forgetting of history required there) or say that the Bible is a general guide to morals, just something to point you in the right direction and something you don't have to follow to the letter. The first two options dismiss themselves, and the third I have just covered. The last option seems the most viable, except that it would make many athesits 'Christian' too as there are many atheists who consider many of the key tenents of the Bible to be worthy instructions that they follow. The only other possible avenue of thought as far as I can see is the 'the Bible was inspired by God but written by mortals' argument, for those who don't believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. The basic idea is that whilst God inspired and directed the writing of the Bible, the people who wrote it made mistakes. The fact that they must therefore have made a lot of mistakes by modern standards aside, it is impossible to realistically tell what is a mistake and what isn't, and of course this would bring us back to the 'but it's just a general guide' argument which has been covered.

As for the non-religious arguments. It is often stated that homosexuality spreads (or helps to spread) aids. Firstly, although for various reasons the aids ratio was higher amongst homosexuals, this is becoming less true as sexual health awareness rises, which brings me to the second problem with the argument which is that no matter what you do, if you do it safely you won't get aids. 'But condoms aren't 100% effective'. No, they're not, but they're near enough it. If you wear one, there is a very high chance that you are safe from aids hence people who are sexually responsible, whatever their sexuality, do not spread aids. Another argument I have heard is that it's not natural, that we are evolved (or designed) to procreate with the opposite gender in order to reproduce. My response to this would be that 'natural' and 'moral' are not synonyms. I would go as far as to say that nature and morality have almost nothing to do with each other. Thus if something is not natural it does not mean that it's wrong. Secondly, we don't exactly have a population problem at the moment. If anything we have an over-population problem so maybe it would help if there were more homosexuals about for a generation or two. Lastly, painting doesn't help you procreate either, but that's not wrong, nor does it inhibit your ability to have children.

The last argument against homosexuality is that it's disgusting. This is easily dismissed by pointing out that I absolutely hate cucumber with a vengance yet if I told you I hated cucumber-lovers or thought that people shouldn't eat cucumbers because they're disgusting I would expect you to question my sanity.

Again, apologies if any of this is old ground. I also realise some of my arguments may not even have been mentioned, but opinions would still be greatly appreciated.

__________________


Don't try and raise me. Who else will tend to the depths?