The ethics of homosexuality.

[Mystech]

Forget that. All of it. All of you have a point. Until there is a human born without choice of male or female then it is not natural. No other animal from dino to roach is having relations with the same sex!!!

Uuum, apparently you're not so great with biology. Homosexuality can be observed in nearly every species of mammal, as well as many birds, especially penguins (and not just because two of ‘em standing together look like two little grooms on top of a wedding cake, either).

Unless we're evolving to this race then lets wait and see what happens. This is just like any other issue in this world. We won't know the problems that will arise from this issue until enough time has passed. Just like any new drug on the market. Sure is works great for one thing but will kill you in the end from another.

What exactly are you talking about? Homosexuality isn't anything new. It's been around as long as recorded history itself, and probably farther back, and even since before man kind.

All I can say is that every single human being in this world has to know deep down (especially homo's) that there are problems and there will be some MAJOR problems in the future that will seriously hurt this world if we continue to try and fool ourselves into believing that being gay is ok.

I'm sorry, but after some good soul searching I can't particularly find this knowledge in my heart. Would you be so kind as to elaborate what exactly these "major problems" might be? I can't seem to find them.

Another minor note, no soul searching is necessary to see that baseless hatred of some group based on entirely harmless individual differences can create some rather major problems. Well, at least on any moral scale that counts oppression, violence, and genocide as being problematic.

For our nation to survive we have to procreate. There's male and female for a reason.

I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here. No one has said that everyone ought to be homosexuals, unlike crazy ranting loons such as yourself, homosexuals aren't evangelical, and the vast vast majority of us realize that sexual orientation isn't something that you can change, so trying to "promote homosexuality" is simply a ridiculous concept to us. Also, as far as procreation goes, humanity isn't exactly having any troubles in that department, at least not when it comes to the idea of not-enough procreation. You should be glad that there are homosexuals out there who won't breed more thirsty mouths to dry away all of the world's fresh water, and gobble up our natural resources even faster.

 

[JohnGalt]

Yes, but more children can make better engines to burn less fuel(or none with an alternate source). Just depends on how well they end up taught(HA!). Okay, go on, I just needed to say that.

 

[duendy]

A very intelligent reply Mystech, your intelligent insight and eloquence, and patience, turns me on.....

 

[Baron Max]

You should be glad that there are homosexuals out there who won't breed ....

Yep, that's the one thing that I am glad about with homos ...they won't breed! I see it as something like nature's way of making humans more like lemmings ....jumping off the cliffs when their population becomes too great for the resources to sustain them. Humans won't jump off cliffs, so nature has devised the homo!

Baron Max

 

[Silas]

I merely cite Mystech's earlier statement:

What exactly are you talking about? Homosexuality isn't anything new. It's been around as long as recorded history itself, and probably farther back, and even since before mankind.

 

[ReighnStorm]

Uuum, apparently you're not so great with biology. Homosexuality can be observed in nearly every species of mammal, as well as many birds, especially penguins (and not just because two of ‘em standing together look like two little grooms on top of a wedding cake, either).

Can a penguin have a baby by itself. NO!
-ReighnStorm-

What exactly are you talking about? Homosexuality isn't anything new. It's been around as long as recorded history itself, and probably farther back, and even since before man kind.

Did you read what the thread is about. I'm talking about homosexuals adopting a child. That will be terrible! And pleas don't ask me why! -ReighnStorm-

I'm sorry, but after some good soul searching I can't particularly find this knowledge in my heart. Would you be so kind as to elaborate what exactly these "major problems" might be? I can't seem to find them.

You can't find them yet because so far the majority of the world agrees with me as far as letting homo's adopt kids. The problems will start then.
(you obviously need to start back at the beginning of the thread)-ReighnStorm-

Another minor note, no soul searching is necessary to see that baseless hatred of some group based on entirely harmless individual differences can create some rather major problems. Well, at least on any moral scale that counts oppression, violence, and genocide as being problematic.

I take great offense to you using the word hate. That is not something I do to anyone. And your not a group of special people with harmless differences. This is a natural disaster, and what happens in most natural disasters. Extinction occurs in one form or another. To tell me that it's perfectly harmless to end humanity because your to busy sexing each other...............do I need to say more??-ReighnStorm-

I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here.
No one has said that everyone ought to be homosexuals, unlike crazy ranting loons such as yourself, homosexuals aren't evangelical, and the vast vast majority of us realize that sexual orientation isn't something that you can change, so trying to "promote homosexuality" is simply a ridiculous concept to us. Also, as far as procreation goes, humanity isn't exactly having any troubles in that department, at least not when it comes to the idea of not-enough procreation. You should be glad that there are homosexuals out there who won't breed more thirsty mouths to dry away all of the world's fresh water, and gobble up our natural resources even faster.

It's really obvious you don't know what's going on here.. The only thing you can seem to do is call names. I don't care about someone being gay. I care about you guys adopting kids, that's all. By the way, have you watched the movie -She hate me- if not I will eloborate about it if you would like.. If you haven't please do..tell me what you think about the lesbian part.

 

[ReighnStorm]

Yep, that's the one thing that I am glad about with homos ...they won't breed! I see it as something like nature's way of making humans more like lemmings ....jumping off the cliffs when their population becomes too great for the resources to sustain them. Humans won't jump off cliffs, so nature has devised the homo!

Baron Max

That's some funny sh!@tt Totally agree with ya!!

 

[kenworth]

if you are about to do a girl up the shitter do you think about ethics?no.

 

[SpyMoose]

I would like to know what the consequences that ReighnStorm fears are and why she will not explicitly state them. If she does not have specific consequences in mind I would like to know how she is certain that her anxiety is being caused by the future rather than her own present dislike for homosexuals. In other words, if the consequences exist only as a vague loathing in her mind, how is she certain that the problem is not coming from elsewhere in her mind rather than being transmitted to her from some undefined point in the future?

 

[Tiassa]

I take great offense to you using the word hate. That is not something I do to anyone.

Could have fooled me. Although the way you present yourself, I would go with, "ignorant resulting in the appearance of being hateful".

For instance, you write, "Can a penguin have a baby by itself(?) No!"

It takes an act of either severe ignorance or deliberate malice to consider that point even remotely significant. To the other, if you're just putting up cannon fodder for the hell of it, why?

So go ahead and start with an article from National Geographic:

Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York's Central Park Zoo have been inseparable for six years now. They display classic pair-bonding behavior—entwining of necks, mutual preening, flipper flapping, and the rest. They also have sex, while ignoring potential female mates.

Wild birds exhibit similar behavior. There are male ostriches that only court their own gender, and pairs of male flamingos that mate, build nests, and even raise foster chicks.

NationalGeographic.com

And here, have a chuckle. Seriously, this one's on me:

A German zoo has abandoned a plan to break up homosexual penguin couples after protests from gay rights groups ....

.... The zoo originally defended the experiment on the grounds that the birds were an endangered species. But after protests from gay rights groups, director Heike Kueck said the zoo was abandoning the plan.

"Everyone can live here as they please," Ms Kueck said.

She said it was not her intention, nor was it possible, to separate the gay couples by force and interest them in their new female companions.

She added that the gay penguins had shown little interest in the females, but this could have been because the program was started too late in the year ....

.... Zoo keepers discovered that the homosexual couples had gathered rocks that they coveted like eggs and fooled their keepers for years into thinking they were boy-and-girl duos.

The Age

(I thought that article was a joke at first. Almost every paragraph reads like a joke out of The Onion. In fact, yeah, that second paragraph qualifies, so the whole damn thing reads like a joke. But apparently it's a serious article ....)

Seriously, ReighnStorm, lighten up. Educate yourself. Give folks here a chance, and they'll even try to be helpful with that.

I mean, you want a connected argument? Fine:

Given that male flamingoes in pair bonding will raise foster chicks, and noting that gay penguins do roost on surrogate rocks, it won't be long before circumstances present them the opportunity to be surrogate parents.​

However, none of that really matters. What penguins do is what penguins do. And the only reason it's important is because every once in a while someone blurts out something about homosexuality not occurring in nature, and who knows, maybe they think they're the first person to think of that argument. But the reality is that homosexuality occurs in nature. Homosexual surrogate parenting occurs in nature.

Don't get me wrong. Give it 'til midsummer and we'll probably hear the assertion again. "It isn't natural!"

But it won't be any more correct then than it is now. Which is not at all.

• • •​

The flip-side of all that, however, is the fact that as a provocateur, you're doing a good enough job of lampooning homophobia that I would be compelled to suggest you seek psychological evaluation of that obsession.

• • •​

Is it a lack of information? A lack of character? A lack of competence?

I mean, if hate is not something you do, then what explains your disdainful behavior?
_____________________

Notes:

Owen, James. "Homosexual Activity Among Animals Stirs Debate". NationalGeographic.com. July 23, 2004. See http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

Hall, Allan. "Zoo ditches gay penguin plan". TheAge.com. February 17, 2005. See http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2005/02/16/1108500150655.html
​

 

[Mystech]

A very intelligent reply Mystech, your intelligent insight and eloquence, and patience, turns me on.....

Make love to me, Duendy, let's do it right here. haha, seriously though, if you're just going to respond with a compliment, especially one of this nature, you might consider simply sending me a private message instead. It's not that I don't like hearing it, I'd just like to keep the thread more tidy.

 

[Mystech]

Did you read what the thread is about. I'm talking about homosexuals adopting a child. That will be terrible! And pleas don't ask me why!

Well, I'm sorry, but I've got to at least ask why I shouldn't ask you why you feel that homosexuals adopting children is terrible. One would think that if it's a belief you hold so strongly that you'd at least be able to offer us some reasoning for it.

You can't find them yet because so far the majority of the world agrees with me as far as letting homo's adopt kids. The problems will start then.

I'm sorry, the problem will start when? You seem to be talking about the past as though it were some hypothetical future. Homosexuals can, and already are raising, and adopting children, at least in the United States. So far as I know Florida is the only state which prohibits this practice. Look at Rosie O'Donnel, she's a lesbian, and last I checked she'd already adopted 3 or so kids.

Whatever problems you're trying to convince us would arise when homosexuals adopt children should already be evident in the world. Could you please point us too them?

Your lack of detailed information has got me so curious that I decided to go looking online for some information regarding the problems caused by homosexuals raising children. Naturally I went to the American Psychological Association, surely if kids raised by homosexuals grew up to be dysfunctional then they'd have something to say about it. Unfortunately, reading what they had to say only confused me more. It seems that they're studies are rather at odds with your personal opinion.

Feel free to do some reading of your own.

http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html

 

[ReighnStorm]

I would like to know what the consequences that ReighnStorm fears are and why she will not explicitly state them. If she does not have specific consequences in mind I would like to know how she is certain that her anxiety is being caused by the future rather than her own present dislike for homosexuals. In other words, if the consequences exist only as a vague loathing in her mind, how is she certain that the problem is not coming from elsewhere in her mind rather than being transmitted to her from some undefined point in the future?

A. The consequences of a child being raised by homosexual partners; just to name a few will HAVE emotional, physical, pyschological,anxiety, racism(unfortunately)ISSUES.......from birth to adulthood.

B. It will be more so in the future if it becomes widespread as they hope it will be.

C. I do not dislike homosexuals. I only (last time I will express this) have issues with them raising children. We're all children of the Earth no matter who we become in the end. Why make a harder than it already is??

D. That's just Stupid. :bugeye:

 

[JohnGalt]

Hey, wait. This one isn't about homosexual's adopting children. Unless, it was somewhere hidden in that first post. This one is about the "ethics of homosexuality". If you ask me, this is about whether being gay is okay, not adoption. The other post you are doing a bad job of representing your case in would be the one about adoption.

Mystech, it's good you researched it, but Rosie isn't a good example(well, she might be, this is just my own opinion).

 

[SpyMoose]

A. The consequences of a child being raised by homosexual partners; just to name a few will HAVE emotional, physical, pyschological,anxiety, racism(unfortunately)ISSUES.......from birth to adulthood.

Why do you believe this is so when the medical establishment, namely the APA and the AAP have explicitly stated it is untrue? What would make doctors endorse homosexual adoption if they know it to be damaging to children?

 

[ReighnStorm]

Hey, wait. This one isn't about homosexual's adopting children. Unless, it was somewhere hidden in that first post. This one is about the "ethics of homosexuality". If you ask me, this is about whether being gay is okay, not adoption. The other post you are doing a bad job of representing your case in would be the one about adoption.

"Whatever man."-reighnstorm-

Mystech, it's good you researched it, but Rosie isn't a good example(well, she might be, this is just my own opinion).

Comedienne ROSIE O'DONNELL has apologised to KIRSTIE ALLEY after she accused the LOOK WHO'S TALKING star of lying about her weight.

After watching Alley telling American TV host MATT LAUER that her largest was 201 pounds (91 kilograms), O'Donnell said, "I am telling you right now, I'm 218 pounds - Kirstie Alley is not 210. She's a lying sack of s**t. At least tell the truth. She's gotta be like 248."

Yeah great example.... once again!

 

[ReighnStorm]

That is not something I do to anyone. And your not a group of special people with harmless differences. This is a natural disaster, and what happens in most natural disasters. Extinction occurs in one form or another. To tell me that it's perfectly harmless to end humanity because your to busy sexing each other...............do I need to say more??-ReighnStorm-

Don't comment on part of the paragraph, comment on it all. Nickpicker!!

Could have fooled me. Although the way you present yourself, I would go with, "ignorant resulting in the appearance of being hateful".

For instance, you write, "Can a penguin have a baby by itself(?) No!"

It takes an act of either severe ignorance or deliberate malice to consider that point even remotely significant. To the other, if you're just putting up cannon fodder for the hell of it, why?

So go ahead and start with an article from National Geographic:



And here, have a chuckle. Seriously, this one's on me:



(I thought that article was a joke at first. Almost every paragraph reads like a joke out of The Onion. In fact, yeah, that second paragraph qualifies, so the whole damn thing reads like a joke. But apparently it's a serious article ....)

Seriously, ReighnStorm, lighten up. Educate yourself. Give folks here a chance, and they'll even try to be helpful with that.

I mean, you want a connected argument? Fine:

Given that male flamingoes in pair bonding will raise foster chicks, and noting that gay penguins do roost on surrogate rocks, it won't be long before circumstances present them the opportunity to be surrogate parents.​

However, none of that really matters. What penguins do is what penguins do. And the only reason it's important is because every once in a while someone blurts out something about homosexuality not occurring in nature, and who knows, maybe they think they're the first person to think of that argument. But the reality is that homosexuality occurs in nature. Homosexual surrogate parenting occurs in nature.

Don't get me wrong. Give it 'til midsummer and we'll probably hear the assertion again. "It isn't natural!"

But it won't be any more correct then than it is now. Which is not at all.

• • •​

The flip-side of all that, however, is the fact that as a provocateur, you're doing a good enough job of lampooning homophobia that I would be compelled to suggest you seek psychological evaluation of that obsession.

• • •​

Is it a lack of information? A lack of character? A lack of competence?

I mean, if hate is not something you do, then what explains your disdainful behavior?
_____________________

Notes:

Owen, James. "Homosexual Activity Among Animals Stirs Debate". NationalGeographic.com. July 23, 2004. See http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

Hall, Allan. "Zoo ditches gay penguin plan". TheAge.com. February 17, 2005. See http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2005/02/16/1108500150655.html
​

 

[JohnGalt]

That doesn't help your case about adoption, the suicide levels. That isn't about those raised by homosexuals, but about homosexuals. If you ask me, it is people that say A)you can't be married, b)you can't adopt, and c)people who are merely predjudiced that leads to the higher suicide rates. The better study would be to discover if these went down after they were allowed to mary(anywhere they chose) and adopt.

I do not know what Tiassa means, but I can assume that she was pointing out the penguins so that you would know it does occur in other animals, not saying that you should emulate them. We follow a similar pattern as those eagles, merely the reverse. The unable are helped, while the able are told to do it on their own.

A penquin cannot have a baby by itself, but homosexuality will always remain a minority(among penguins AND humans), so it doesn't matter if the gays don't have children, a majority of people will still be having straight relations and having children.

Enough homophobial bickerings. Apparently, storm is not a homophobo and is going to fight to the death to defend that, so quit calling storm it(even though it seems most approriate). Please, don't do it, I'm not in the mood for another huge multicolored post about it.

 

[SpyMoose]

This is for Tiassa:

Your most recent reply to Tiassa is flawed on a number of counts. Firstly it violates the forums policy on cutting and pasting from external sources. It also violates the forums policy on plagiarism, as you presented the arguments as your own instead of citing their source. You did however leave the name NARTH in the body of the text, which has previously been debunked as a religious organization and not a scientific one. You also implied that by reminding you that homosexuality does occur in nature someone was endorsing all practices that occur in nature, which is not true, ask Odtheap as the "Natural" argument was his favorite for quite some time. The purpose of stating that homosexuality is natural is to refute claims that it is not natural, which is most commonly a lead in to the idea that homosexuality is a choice.

 

[SpyMoose]

And your not a group of special people with harmless differences. This is a natural disaster, and what happens in most natural disasters. Extinction occurs in one form or another.

To my knowledge the word "extinction" has a clear definition. Dictionary.com also believes this, so I will ask you to elaborate to which definition you are referring. I suppose you could mean that you think homosexuality causes nerve damage, but I can't be sure what mechanism you believe to be the cause of this. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=extinction

I would also like you to explain what you believe a natural disaster is and how homosexuality qualifies. You have mentioned that this is what you believe homosexuality to be, but have not qualified this statement. I do not believe the discussion can move forward until you do, as it seems to be related to the root of your opposition to homosexuality.