Reply
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 02/29/2008
Offline
8030 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

hannah-goes-rawr wrote:

add to that the social ramifications of using a word like "defect" and it's easy to see why you're way off the mark.


Thanks for exposing your entire agenda. Your argument isn't scientific at all. It's an appeal to emotion in the guise of concrete fact.

 

Social ramications, i.e. "If you call it what is, people might be mean to them *tear*"

 

"evolution doesn't have a goal, it just is."

 

 

"homosexuality is a product of evolution"

 

If there is no such thing as an intelligent designer, then any and all disorders are a product of evolution.

 

 

 


Asperger's is the leading cause of hate against women. End patriarchy now by donating to the EminentFury Asperger's Research Fund.
Wais_45 is a good guy.
Message 121 of 186 (207 Views)
0 Likes
Limit Breaker
Registered: 05/24/2009
Offline
18676 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

Except evolution does have a purpose. To continue a species, survival... etc etc.  Which the idea of homosexual relationships completely undermine.



RE-THINK SALAD


Message 122 of 186 (205 Views)
0 Likes
Wastelander
Registered: 10/09/2013
Offline
590 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

EminentFury wrote:

hannah-goes-rawr wrote:

 


the desire to use them is a crapshoot.

Nope. Mankind's surival, and the survival of all species, is dependant upon us reproducing. We are born with a desire to use them in a way that corresponds with the natural order.


no.

 

the biological imperative to reproduce is not focused on the individual, it's about genes. homosexuality doesn't interfere with the continuation of a gene pool so it's not a defect.

ferguson is a weird name for an iraqi village
Message 123 of 186 (201 Views)
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 02/29/2008
Offline
8030 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

Homosexual apologists object to the term "defect" because they have a superiority complex. By treating the term "defect/disorder" as if it was a pejorative, you're demeaning people with other recognized disorders outside of homosexuality. That's so sad and mean-spirited of homosexual advocates. I know homosexual advocates are desperate to achieve "equal rights", but, rest assured - its classification as a disorder won't undermine your efforts. I promise.


Asperger's is the leading cause of hate against women. End patriarchy now by donating to the EminentFury Asperger's Research Fund.
Wais_45 is a good guy.
Message 124 of 186 (200 Views)
0 Likes
Highlighted
Wastelander
Registered: 10/09/2013
Offline
590 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

Setzaroth wrote:

Except evolution does have a purpose. To continue a species, survival... etc etc.  Which the idea of homosexual relationships completely undermine.



except it doesn't. evolution is just a mechanism of continuation of a species, it's not a goal of evolution to enforce individual reproduction. the most obvious example is found in eusocial species like ants bees and naked mole rats. 

 

when you take away the fluff and stuff of eminent's argument, you realize he's full of **bleep**.

ferguson is a weird name for an iraqi village
Message 125 of 186 (199 Views)
Wastelander
Registered: 10/09/2013
Offline
590 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

[ Edited ]
Jun 25, 2014

EminentFury wrote:

Homosexual apologists object to the term "defect" because they have a superiority complex. By treating the term "defect/disorder" as if it was a pejorative, you're demeaning people with other recognized disorders outside of homosexuality. That's so sad and mean-spirited of homosexual advocates. I know homosexual advocates are desperate to achieve "equal rights", but, rest assured - its classification as a disorder won't undermine your efforts. I promise.


except it's not a defect. it's just not. it never will be. the biological imperative doesn't care about the individual, it's about the gene pool. it's completely natural (as is, regrettably, just about everything). once you figure out that everything's natural, it comes to philosophical debate as to whether or not it's right or wrong.

 

a defect, at least as far as biology would be concerned, would be a queen bee unable to product offspring or something MS. stuff that has biological and anthropological reasoning behind it to be considered a defect. homosexuality doesn't fit the bill.

ferguson is a weird name for an iraqi village
Message 126 of 186 (198 Views)
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 02/29/2008
Offline
8030 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

hannah-goes-rawr wrote:

EminentFury wrote:

hannah-goes-rawr wrote:

 


the desire to use them is a crapshoot.

Nope. Mankind's surival, and the survival of all species, is dependant upon us reproducing. We are born with a desire to use them in a way that corresponds with the natural order.


no.

 

the biological imperative to reproduce is not focused on the individual, it's about genes. homosexuality doesn't interfere with the continuation of a gene pool so it's not a defect.


Yep.

 

On an individual basis, it does interfere with the continuance of mankind.

 

It's ingrained in us. Heterosexuality is normal. Homosexuality is not. Sorry.


Asperger's is the leading cause of hate against women. End patriarchy now by donating to the EminentFury Asperger's Research Fund.
Wais_45 is a good guy.
Message 127 of 186 (192 Views)
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 02/29/2008
Offline
8030 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

hannah-goes-rawr wrote:

EminentFury wrote:

Homosexual apologists object to the term "defect" because they have a superiority complex. By treating the term "defect/disorder" as if it was a pejorative, you're demeaning people with other recognized disorders outside of homosexuality. That's so sad and mean-spirited of homosexual advocates. I know homosexual advocates are desperate to achieve "equal rights", but, rest assured - its classification as a disorder won't undermine your efforts. I promise.


except it's not a defect. it's just not. it never will be. the biological imperative doesn't care about the individual, it's about the gene pool. it's completely natural (as is, regrettably, just about everything). once you figure out that everything's natural, it comes to philosophical debate as to whether or not it's right or wrong.

 

a defect, at least as far as biology would be concerned, would be a queen bee unable to product offspring or something MS. stuff that has biological and anthropological reasoning behind it to be considered a defect. homosexuality doesn't fit the bill.


Except, it is a defect.

 

'queen bee unable to produce offspring' That's a defect with her reproductive system. This is a neurological defect that ultimately effects a person's ability to reproduce, since desire is generally a necessary component.


Asperger's is the leading cause of hate against women. End patriarchy now by donating to the EminentFury Asperger's Research Fund.
Wais_45 is a good guy.
Message 128 of 186 (191 Views)
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 02/29/2008
Offline
8030 posts
 

Re: hRe: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

hannah-goes-rawr wrote:

Setzaroth wrote:

Except evolution does have a purpose. To continue a species, survival... etc etc.  Which the idea of homosexual relationships completely undermine.



except it doesn't. evolution is just a mechanism of continuation of a species, it's not a goal of evolution to enforce individual reproduction. the most obvious example is found in eusocial species like ants bees and naked mole rats. 

 

when you take away the fluff and stuff of eminent's argument, you realize he's full of **bleep**.


Correct. Continuation of a species requires a little more than just giving the being the necessary parts.

 

Lol.


Asperger's is the leading cause of hate against women. End patriarchy now by donating to the EminentFury Asperger's Research Fund.
Wais_45 is a good guy.
Message 129 of 186 (187 Views)
0 Likes
Wastelander
Registered: 10/09/2013
Offline
590 posts
 

Re: Heterosexuality: Normal Or Just Common?

Jun 25, 2014

to bring this ignorant argument to a close: it's about the biological imperative. the success of the gene pool is what matters, not the success of the individual's copulation. a defect, as far as human sexuality is concerned, would include sterility or being incapable of having offspring or being aroused. homosexuality does, in fact, not hinder a person's ability to have children or to take care of offspring - thus providing continuity in the species. to be a biological defect it must hinder the biological imperative. homosexuality does not do this, so it's not a defect.

 

biology: 1

eminentfury: 0

ferguson is a weird name for an iraqi village
Message 130 of 186 (186 Views)