@Jtg473 "How are 2 guys incompatible? Seems like the puzzle pieces fit. Look up anal sex" Sodomy isn't actuall sex. By your logic, a person could penetrate someone else's eye-socket and it could still qualify as intercourse because it involves a hole and the male genitalia. "Who said that the point of sex was to copulate" Our own bodies. One could argue that we have sex for conjugal purposes, but that doesn't negate the function of our bodies during the act. "Well thankfully gay people can have sex. Here is a link, I can tell you are inexperienced:" Ah. Wiki. Cute. Sodomy is essentially any alternative act to sex used to achieve climax with or without another person. Phrases like "anal sex" and "oral sex" originated from popular culture. Not a real identification of "sex." "If nature really didn't intend for gay people, it wouldn't have been possible. Nature could have made it anatomically impossible but it didn't." You're confusing the nature of sex with penetration....Probably on purpose. "You can phrase a question to illicit a certain response. " Are you insinuating that I did such a thing? What about my phrasing is inaccurate? What is it about my question that's illogical to you?
@Jtg473 That POV presupposes that nature had anything to do with developing urges for a particular person or thing. And nature is not an arbitrator of propriety. If such were the case, Polydactyls Siamese twins would be considered perfectly normal. Functionality is identified through anatomically correct behavior, which is in turn identified as what's proper--for obvious reasons.
@Ewan "Drop the scientific crap and look at it from a human perspective and maybe you will get it. Why should a gay person be fine watching a man and a women have sex? having sex is an incredibly personal act." The act of sexual intercourse has protocols. It's not subject to interpretation. I'm sure people can achieve climax in many different ways, but that doesn't make them anatomically correct--and that sure as heck doesn't mean they should be endorse or considered benign.
@Ewan223 "There put under pressure because its the correct thing to say. If it wasn't for science people would still not understand homosexuality at all." As I already pointed out: no study has actually proven anything beyond the acknowledgement of an existence of a behavior. And behavior itself is not evidence of a genetic predisposition. As such, legislative powers haven't been pressured by actual scientific discoveries of what homosexuality is, but rather by the screaming masses that insist the nature of the behavior is categorized as "born that way." The idea that science has proven anything in regards to this matter is a largely held view that's just as cultural in nature as the phrase, "born that way." Cultural phenomena are not conducive to fact. Legislation is supposed to be undertaken objectively, and not while under the gun of social groups. "Whatever way you look at it thousands of gay teens are put through hell because there gay Who in hell would choice that." We all have impulses that may or may not be considered kosher by the general public. One could just as easily say, "who would choose to think these things," and that wouldn't dispel the fact that they're not genetically ingrained thought constructs. Whether or not they're acted upon however, is--regardless of their nature--a choice. A person can be born homosexual, as you assert, and still have the ability to act on those feelings or not. That's why it's identified as a lifestyle.
@Ewan223 "I wasn't calling you a bigot. As I said I called the view point stupid and bigoted. No one was ever saying gay sex shouldn't I suppose disgust you or whatever, since a gay person feels exactly the same way about straight sex." - - Should or should not is the question here though isn't. On one hand, a person is disgusted with the idea that two people with the exact same physiology try to commingle their organs in an esoteric fashion that defies the function of their anatomy. On the other had, a person is completely disgusted with two people with opposite anatomies coupling in such a way that is anatomically correct. Which point of view sounds more confused or more disorderly?
@Ewan223 "I'm pretty sure that I could find some form of quote from a scientist that it is most likely you are born gay" You could find a lot of quote from a lot of scientists. What exactly does that prove though? To date, no study has really been able to prove anything. All legislative acts with regards to homosexuality have been carried out based on pressure from social groups who maintain a consistent hearsay of, "I feel I was born that way." Feelings are not proof. And I disapprove of homosexuality and of the idea that it's a birthed trait. That's not equatable to hating people who don't share my views.
@gamebuyer22 Same story with a bunch of people here--me included. People's posts have been deleted and warnings have been handed out due to "offensive" content even while no one has actually been derogatory. I guess all it takes is the accusation of offense to prove what you post qualifies as offensive content.
I don't mean to dig up a horse on its way to being long dead, but I had to read back through the pages to find a particular post and I stumbled upon a response from cutmasterfrost that I missed: @cutmasterfrost "and thats why your generation sucks, exposing such a cultural aspect to you children?" I'm 25. My generation is your generation. If you catch this post, that should add some perspective to your views.
@sinex1983 "So in the interest of speaking from a defensible position I did some research on "homosexuality as aberrant behavior" and couldn't find a single scientific or medical article supporting that stance dated after 1995. Clearly my original assertion was incorrect." Keep in mind that every single study is subject to social pressures. Regardless of the truth, people will categorize a study that disagrees with their lifestyle as being offensive even if the observations are totally objective. You need look no further than this thread for evidence. I haven't made any attempts to insult people, use derogatory language, or threaten people with violence, and yet that is exactly what has been directed at me. Reactionary mindsets undermine the integrity of any study performed in regard to a particular social group or behavior. Aberrant is a perfectly reasonable observation of two people of the same sex attempting to couple as it defies the tenements of anatomical correctness. Anatomy is a hurdle you'll never pass on this issue.
Ryouga001's comments