Homophobes:: GET A CLUE!!!, page 36

posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 08:15 PM

link

Originally posted by arollingstone
reply to post by meeneecat

By 'unnatural' I mean that it goes against our natural survival instincts - specifically the drive to reproduce.
Barking up the wrong tree, mate.

Oh I think I'm definitely barking up the right tree. First of all, you were not the only one to make this argument. But more importantly, even though you may have not *meant* it that way, and as "unbiased" and "open" as you believe yourself to be (and yes I did read your whole post, of which amounted to "homosexuality is unnatural, but I'm cool with it cause I'm open minded"...which, to make an analogy, is kinda like saying "interracial marriage is unnatural, but I'm cool with it because I'm open minded")...sorry, but it's still insulting. And as I said before, it still doesn't have any scientific basis, it is a FACT that animals engage in homosexual behavior, you don't have to take my word for it, go out and observe some bonobos, or dolphins, or goats or, or, or, or..., I don't care how many people have supposedly "debunked" it. There are "debunkers" to the concepts of evolution and gravity, doesn't make these people "right". Point is, it is an accepted scientific fact that homosexuality exists in animals)...Furthermore, the whole "heterosexual reproduction = natural" and "homosexuality = going against nature" these arguments are still one of the basics in the homophobia playbook, so yes, I take issue with it regardless of who the speaker is or how that person "meant" it. Still, you chose to elaborate in your last post, arguing that homosexuality goes against the laws of natural selection and darwinism (again, you state this as if it is fact, despite scientific & real world evidence to the contrary)...IF it goes against natural selection and darwinism, than how would these animal species still be here? how would there continue to be homosexual behavior in so many varieties of animal species generation after generation after generation if it were so detrimental to their survival? Simple answer is because it's perfectly natural, and rather than being a detriment to their survival, it's actually the opposite, it helps them to thrive. So again, when it comes to denying rights to gays through marriage, health insurance and other injustices anyone who is gay will tell you that one of the top arguments for denying rights is always the "it's unnatural" shtick. So even if you didn't *mean* it that way, and maybe you are all for gay marriage and benefits and all that, but by repeating the whole "unnatural" bit, you are still perpetrating this false idea to others and encouraging them to think that homosexuality is somehow "less than" heterosexuality. Regardless of how you *personally* feel about homosexuality and everything else you wrote in your post; whether you think it's right or wrong is irrelevant, my argument remains the same, that reproduction is not the sole reason that animals engage in certain forms of sexual behavior, and again these animals do these behaviors for reasons that are ingrained into their animal society, for reasons that help them to live & thrive. Thus if you are going to label "reproduction" natural than by default you must also label homosexuality "natural"...again, don't take my word for it, go ask the animals, can't get any more "natural" than animal behavior.

Don't mean to keep repeating this, I just take issue with people spreading what amount to unscientific falsities on a public forum and so feel a duty to set the record straight, especially when we are talking about human beings and denying them equal treatment & rights based on, what amounts to the belief in false unsubstantiated ideas.

CayceFan

posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 09:21 PM

link

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by CayceFan

Originally posted by canofnothing
reply to post by mizbeach40

If people are openly hateful to gays on this site they should be booted. It would help eliminate the discrediting posts which provide no real information and are just trolling posts sending us on wild goose chases. I find it irritating on the internet to have to filter through bad info, luckily here that's not such a problem. On a website I go to they told me that these type of people are undisiered on their site because they only cause trouble. It would help to make the site more efficient.

That might be the stupidest thing I've read on this thread.

Stupidest? Could you possibly mean "most stupid'?

Openly hateful - - - would mean inflammatory derogatory insults. I happen to agree with the post.

Opinion is one thing - - - even negative opinion. Inflammatory derogatory insults - - - is something else entirely.

Who are you quoting - ("most stupid")? Could you possibly have meant to type ...

"Stupidest"? Could you possibly mean most stupid?

You see I typed the word stupidest so you should have marked that with quotes - not what you had typed - "most stupid."

I just love it when someone comes on to try and make someone look silly by pointing out something petty (Use of slang in this case) only to prove themselves ignorant (you using quotes on your verbiage instead of mine).

I really don't care to know if you "happen to agree with the post" (there, I've shown you twice now the correct use of quotations -no charge).

I've saw a few of your comments in the past on various threads, to me your opinion/thoughts/comments rank among the lowest of any as far as I'm concerned.

edit on 13-3-2011 by CayceFan because: (no reason given)

theRhenn

posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 10:01 PM

link

It seriously boils down to a matter of opinion at this point. Id hate to say that I'm that closely related to the animal kingdom when I see nothing that shows that there are other species on this planet that seem to reason, build civilizations, create and use sophisticated tools, ect. Personly, I believe that if animals (non human) share any of these qualities, they would have evolved into more of a complex life form rather than becomming the food on our plates. I also feel that just because you see animals doing things, doesnt mean that humans should carry the same traits. The diffrence between human and animal in this, is that humans can reason and choose, were as animals follow instinct period and nothing else. To be honest, I've seen animals take on these roles of same sex partners, but for what reason? Animals cant reason so why do they do it? There must be an answer to this. Relieving pressure? lol humor humor... When animals do this, do they actually penitrate the anus of the other animal? Or are they still aiming for the feminine area of the creature as though it was a female? Perhaps animals find the need to release their sperm wether it be same sex or not, simply becaused they are programmed to, and not because they desire that specific gender. Who knows. I'm not a pro in this field, but like anyone else, I can draw some pretty interesting theories about it that makes sense to me, just as the opposite makes sense to you.

Why are we emulating lower species? Why would we compare ourselves to subspecies?

Here are a few things that comes to mind when I think of this subject:

1) Animals do strange things. Dogs hump legs, elephants hump cars, nearly crushing people inside (hey, this is true! There is an article that just came around, just days ago, a google search will find this easily... An Elephant found a car appealing so it just straddled it, crushing the car, humping away, nearly killing the people inside. I've seen funny clips where rhinoes have done the same thing on a safari. Odd as it sounds, it does happen. So does this mean we should accept people plugging tailpipes in this way?

2) Religion: I can see where this causes problems for people, simply because it's related to religion. Catholics and other religions in many, many years past have demonised this practice, because they did not want to see people do these acts in fear that it would get out of hand and the need for procreation would deminish, yet, there are many an example that even though men and women desired these acts, they still held on to the family unit. Sure, you'll also find that these religions also banned such acts because they looked upon it as an evil thing. It was considered crude acts of lust.

3) If we use the fact that animals do this, and it's perfectly ok for humans because animals do this, and we're somehow related to these same animals... Is it also ok to canibalise one another? Insects do it. So if this argument holds water, then we too should also be allowed to eat one another just as plants, animals and insects do.

If this is a case of being open minded about what we do not understand, then the same holds true that those that practice this should as well be open minded that this is possible a negative, social or lustful trait.

If it all boils down to acceptance, then there could be a fine line that divides us. Never should we condem another for something we do not understand. Never should we hate or bash someone because of their feelings, desires or beliefs. If it does not agree with us, we, as humans, intellectually superior beings, we have the ability and option to either look or walk the other way. Bashing someone over their desires is just as wrong as bashing anyone else for anything else.

There are some here that can read this responce and see reason in it. There are some that will mock me for it, but that person would be just as narrowminded as those that he accuses of such. There are some that will see this and not agree but choose to see it as a possibility still. Some will find this reasoning wrong all together, yet unfased, they will move on with their lives and live it like they do every day, while having the ability to use the same laws to protect themselves that anyone else in this country can use.

This is nothing more than another kind of racism. It's just not race related. Why cant everyone just accept the other for who they are and move on. If someone is shoving something down your throat (no pun intended), you have a right to defend yourself and stand up for what you believe in. Sometimes it's far better to just leave it alone and let the world do what it wants to do to find it's own happyness. When a topic is left alone for so long, eventually people forget and move on. True, the topic can be beaten to death in hopes that everyone will get tired of hearing it and eventually no one will care anymore. But, I think it's alot like race. The more it's on the table, the more fule you give one side or the other. So long as there are warriors in a cause, there will be war! Take away the fighters and you will have peace. Even evil eyed peace is far better than gut spilling war. We are human. We diffrer in everything. Everyone has a point of view. When we stop finding reasons for bickering and fighting, our race will truely evolve into something more beautiful than what we have turned ourselves into for the sake of wanting to to be more right than the person before us.

I am open minded. I accept that this could be part of something much bigger than me and I wont push the issue. Actually, I'm going against my own beliefs by taking the time to write about this subject. If you see me as a gay basher, then you are missing the point entirely. But hey, I can take it if anyone wants to read between the lines... Trust me, there is nothing there. I say what I feel and I never hold anything back. If I wanted to bash gays, i'd come right out and do it. I dont feel that any reputation here in these forums is a reputation I can feed myself or my family with, nor does it effect me in any way shape or form. Though, like every single person here, I have a right to opinion... At least I give examples to back up what I think. If you can show me something that counters what I say, and I feel that it's correct, by all means, change my mind. I would love that.

All in all.. I see a thread with many weekend warriors (religion not following scripture). I see alot of closed minded people here. I see alot of people that accept the fact that people are diffrent. I see people who are caught somewhere in the middle. I also see alot of people throwing stuff in here that really doesnt add up when you look at it. How many of you will eat your young? How many will kick your newborn out of the next because an unfamiliar scent has been placed on it... a stranger touching your baby. Cats and birds do this.

Folx.. I'm sorry to say, we are not animals. We are human. Sure, we are labled as part of an animal kingdom, only because someone decided to put us there a long time ago. Does that mean that we are indeed animals because we have some similar characteristics? (shrugs) Its sad to see science as this narrowminded.

I know that I am far superior. Animals are beneath me and always shall be, unless of course, you can show me an example of a monkey, dog, dolphen that can do geometry and navigate the solar system. Not for another 4.5 million years huh? Guess we will not know for sure till then. And untill then, hey! Keep me posted!

Love you guys!

Varemia

posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 10:24 PM

link

reply to post by theRhenn

It could kind of be because humans kill almost everything they come into contact with. There are a lot of intelligent animals, but half the time people forget they exist, or they kill them all.

I mean, humans basically murder anything that doesn't fight back. Look at the dodo birds. They were completely peaceful creatures because there were no predators on their islands. Humans arrived and killed them for sport until they were extinct. They didn't even use them for food.

Humans are not superior because of intelligence or morals or anything. We are superior because we kill everything else.

As for intelligent animals, I can recall certain birds that had the capability of doing math at a three year old level and learn language. You may say "oh, well three years old is one stupid animal," but it actually says that these animals have the potential to evolve into smarter creatures. It just hasn't been a survival trait with them as it is with humans. Humans would die in the wild without the ability to learn and use tools. Other animals don't happen to require that as a survival trait.

Then you have the monkeys that can learn to speak in sign language because they lack a certain part of the brain that deals with articulating sound, but still have the visual learning capability. I mean, to act like humans are superior because we build stuff and destroy everything that gets in our way, that just means we're dominating, which is not the same as superior.

arollingstone

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 02:09 AM

link

Barking up the wrong tree. I said it was ok to be gay, what more do you want? Your arguments are not factual, you cite a single book. That's like presenting everything in 'The Biggest Secret' as commonly accepted objective facts.

IF it goes against natural selection and darwinism, than how would these animal species still be here?

Because they are in the minority of their population... not all dolphins and baboons are gay.

d as "unbiased" and "open" as you believe yourself to be (and yes I did read your whole post, of which amounted to "homosexuality is unnatural, but I'm cool with it cause I'm open minded"...which, to make an analogy, is kinda like saying "interracial marriage is unnatural, but I'm cool with it because I'm open minded")...sorry, but it's still insulting.

Then you're over-sensitive or too ignorant to understand my initial post, you compartmentalise things too much - don't blame that on me. It's nothing like saying "interracial marriage is unnatural" either, bad analogy.

Still, you chose to elaborate in your last post, arguing that homosexuality goes against the laws of natural selection and darwinism (again, you state this as if it is fact, despite scientific & real world evidence to the contrary)

No, I stated this as an opinion. You are the one stating flimsy research as 'facts' - all your eggs in one basket, etc..

Simple answer is because it's perfectly natural, and rather than being a detriment to their survival, it's actually the opposite, it helps them to thrive.

How? Please explain this correlation.

So again, when it comes to denying rights to gays through marriage, health insurance and other injustices anyone who is gay will tell you that one of the top arguments for denying rights is always the "it's unnatural" shtick. So even if you didn't *mean* it that way, and maybe you are all for gay marriage and benefits and all that, but by repeating the whole "unnatural" bit, you are still perpetrating this false idea to others and encouraging them to think that homosexuality is somehow "less than" heterosexuality.

Maybe if you're are too close-minded to accept my opinion as it stands, you assume it means or represents something else. You really are having a go at the wrong person. I said theres nothing wrong with it.. how does that perpetrate anything other than that? Not everyone is a homophobe, some people have their own perspectives on things - deal with it. If you think I'm a subconscious homophobe then you're paranoid, or you expect too much. Sure I don't have a problem with homosexuals and I'd accept them wholeheartedly, but I'm not necessarily going to encourage it other than saying 'if it makes you happy, go for it'. If you don't like that, too bad.

I also mentioned that having a particular taste in food is unnatural, belief in God is unnatural, etc. - does that mean I think having a taste in food is 'less' than not having one? No. There's a lot of haters out there, go tell them man, not me - I don't need telling. I don't place emphasis on things like sexual orientation, I measure peoples' worth pretty much based on how compassionate they are and how hard they try to grow as people.

Grr... not what I need in the morning!

edit on 14-3-2011 by arollingstone because: add text

edit on 14-3-2011 by arollingstone because: (no reason given)

meeneecat

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 12:23 PM

link

Originally posted by theRhenn
I also feel that just because you see animals doing things, doesnt mean that humans should carry the same traits. The diffrence between human and animal in this, is that humans can reason and choose, were as animals follow instinct period and nothing else.

Hate to break it to you but, even have a "gut feeling" humans have instinct too, as much as you want to try to separate yourself from animals, we are more like them than most people want to believe...it's not all about "reasoning and choice". The reason that we don't eat food when it smells bad is out of instinct...same with animals. We use our sense of smell and can tell in an instant, rather then reading the expiration date and using "logic" and possibly getting it wrong. (since dates can be misleading, the product could have been stored wrong etc.) Instinct is just as an important part of our survival as intelligence, to try to discount one for the other would be plain ignorant. We use instinct all the time, when we pick a partner (why are we attracted to some and not others, for example = instinct), when we eat (example already given), and we use our instincts all the time when we move around in the world. So you say just because "animals do them" doesn't necessarily mean humans should do them, well yes, but then again, the opposite is also true "just because animals do certain things doesn't mean humans should do these things also". Animals hunt, doesn't mean that humans shouldn't hunt too. Logically here you are tying two really unrelated things together, combined with some omission of facts (that animal use instinct and humans use reasoning, except that humans also use instinct) and trying to argue that X is therefor true. Doesn't work.

Originally posted by theRhennTo be honest, I've seen animals take on these roles of same sex partners, but for what reason? Animals cant reason so why do they do it? There must be an answer to this. Relieving pressure? lol humor humor... When animals do this, do they actually penitrate the anus of the other animal? Or are they still aiming for the feminine area of the creature as though it was a female? Perhaps animals find the need to release their sperm wether it be same sex or not, simply becaused they are programmed to, and not because they desire that specific gender. Who knows.

Also called "argument by uninformed opinion" There are actually answers to these questions, some were given in the article I linked, some you can find by doing you own research. It is not my job to feed you the information, I gave you a start, if you are wondering about these questions then try looking for the answers, but don't make up your own assumptions and try to use that as proof against what has already been proven by research and study.

Originally posted by theRhennWhy are we emulating lower species? Why would we compare ourselves to subspecies?

Genetic Fallacy, just because you happen to think animals are "below" us, or are a "subspecies" doesn't mean that we don't have similar traits that can be found in some animal species (for example, mourning/burying our dead, certain mating rituals, sports, grooming; all behaviors that are found in animals & humans) Secondly, it is your OPINION that animals are a "lower species" or a "subspecies", this is not something that should be used in a scientific discussion of fact.

Originally posted by theRhennHere are a few things that comes to mind when I think of this subject:

1) Animals do strange things. ......etc. etc.

3) If we use the fact that animals do this, and it's perfectly ok for humans because animals do this, and we're somehow related to these same animals... Is it also ok to canibalise one another? Insects do it. So if this argument holds water, then we too should also be allowed to eat one another just as plants, animals and insects do.

Again, you are continuing with the same line of reasoning, repeating the same thing over and over does not make it so, you are also setting up a straw-man here asking about cannibalization (which, by the way, has been observed in humans before, but for the record I do not believe it is "okay" or "moral") either way, you argument here is irrelevant you are still making a false equivalency here and simplifying the facts (i.e. just because animals do it doesn't mean people should re: cannibalism), yes well, it might be true that humans should not practice cannibalism "because animals do it", but there are still things that animals do that humans also do (it's part of our evolution). Aside from that, my argument was not about emulating animal behavior. My argument was in response to several comments where people had cited homosexuality as being "unnatural". I pointed out to them that homosexuality had been observed, proven, & studied in animal behavior, that it was a part of their evolutionary behavior, that it helped the species to live, that it had a purpose, that it wasn't just some random "freak of nature" that it had been observed with frequency and consistency and that it served a purpose. Again, you don't have to take my word for it, because I already pointed out some research that had been done, and by the looks of your response, it doesn't appear that you have read any of the research or studies. (hence your list of nonsensical reasons as to why you think there's homosexuality in animals, and then your admission of "who knows") again, lots of people know, and it would behoove you to also know before you put out a list of assumptions like you did.

Originally posted by theRhennIf this is a case of being open minded about what we do not understand, ...

I already said that my response had nothing to do with being open minded, or about acceptance or anything else along that line. This is about a few people spouting lies (that homosexuality is unnatural, hence, not found in nature) and about wanting to correct those lies with proven scientific facts, and again, it is a generally accepted fact (just like evolution & gravity) that homosexuality occurs in nature among animals. It's been observed. Consistently. Over generations of animals.

Originally posted by theRhennI know that I am far superior. Animals are beneath me and always shall be, unless of course, you can show me an example of a monkey, dog, dolphen that can do geometry and navigate the solar system.

And you have just proven yourself to be far more ignorant than any animal will ever be. (also learn to spell check, it's not that hard)

meeneecat

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 12:56 PM

link

Originally posted by arollingstoneBecause they are in the minority of their population... not all dolphins and baboons are gay.

Another person who did not read any of the research that I linked to, nor did any research on their own. Did I say that the dolphins were "gay". I said homosexual behavior. These animals are not in the minority of their population, they are in the majority of their population. Most of the males do this. And as far as has been observed ALL of the animals in some species. Just because an animal engaged in homosexual behavior, has oral, anal, sex with an animal of the same gender does not mean that that animal doesn't reproduce. You are not being logical here. I'm talking about something that has been shown scientifically, something that you apparently have not read much about seeing as you actually believe that homosexuality in a majority of a species could lead to it's extinction. I already mentioned this, but it's been shown that these animals engaging in homosexual sex actually had BENEFITS for the species as a whole. Seriously bugs me to try and have a scientific conversation of fact with someone who keep trying to bring lies and half truths into the conversation. Seriously, don't do it, you only make yourself look ignorant.

Originally posted by arollingstone[/iThen you're over-sensitive or too ignorant to understand my initial post, you compartmentalise things too much - don't blame that on me. It's nothing like saying "interracial marriage is unnatural" either, bad analogy.

Simply put you can say this because you don't have to deal with ignorant bastards your whole life and don't know what it's like. Reminds me of white people when they say that black people are too sensitive over race. Or some dude telling a woman to "get over" the sexism she had to put up with all the time. Honestly, the privileged folk seem to get so worked up when anyone points out their ignorance, homosexuality, racism, sexism, etc. as if it's their god given right to treat other people like half people and call them names. Well, your perfectly free to do this and have your opinion under the constitution, but just don't be surprised when you get people standing up for themselves.

Originally posted by arollingstone
You are the one stating flimsy research as 'facts' - all your eggs in one basket, etc..

Not flimsy research. Accepted fact. Proven observation. Again, I'm not going to take your word for it, because you've already shown (above and below) that you haven't educated yourself on the subject.

Originally posted by arollingstone
How? Please explain this correlation.

Again admitting that you are either too lazy to do the research, I even gave you a link. Too lazy to click on it? or willful ignorance? I don't know, but I shouldn't have to spoon feed the information to you, I'm assuming that you are a big boy and knows how to use the googles himself. I gave you a few examples anyway. I just happen to think it's highly annoying that you keep making arguments based on assumptions rather than reading up on the subject and using facts. But instead of doing your own research to support your arguments, you just make fun of my facts. But go ahead, I challenge you to prove that homosexuality is not found in nature (you've already asserted that it's unnatural, so I'm taking that to the bank, prove it)

Originally posted by arollingstoneMaybe if you're are too close-minded to accept my opinion as it stands, you assume it means or represents something else.

Again with the closeminded-ness...didn't I already say it has nothing to do with that? I understand that there are ignorant people in the world that believe strange things, people used to believe the world was flat. But in this case it has nothing to do with your opinion. I could care less actually what you think of gay people. To me you'd either be one of the ignorant that hate us, or one of the ones that support us. Either way it's inconsequential to the argument, despite how you keep trying to make it about "your opinion" "open-mindedness" etc. It's simply a case where you stated something that was simply not true. Period. In the interest of all the other people who read these forums, I want to set the record straight, since it is an accepted fact that homosexual behavior occurs in nature. It's an accepted fact that the vast majority of certain species' males or females practice homosexuality (again, not just a fluke, or a "rogue" few animals). It's an accepted fact that this behavior is not a detriment, but an enhancement to their survival (all you have to do is see the fact that the species is here, alive, on planet earth, in large numbers. to know that. duh.)

So again, simply put, you stated that "homosexuality was unnatural" and "not all dolphins or baboons are gay, they are in the minority" (otherwise they would die off). So I simply challenge you to back up what you are saying. Prove it. No obfuscations, no trying to make it about "being open-minded" or changing the subject. Just back up what you are saying. Period.

arollingstone

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link

reply to post by meeneecat

Ok pal, this is my last reply to you. I am on your side. I said its ok to be gay. If someone isn't willing to accept you for who you are, debate with them. If they say they will accept who you are, why attack them? I stated an unbiased opinion, you disagree ok fine - move on to those spouting out religious rhetoric and condemning you.

Why am I bothering to reply? Because you're trying to accuse me of something that clearly isn't true. I am frustrated by the manner in which you present 'scientific facts' in an attempt to discredit me personally, rather than my actual post - which you have either not read or not understood - this is what I will address in this post.

Trust me, if you read this with an open mind and direct your arguments at those who disagree, you will learn how to better present your findings on this forum.However, first allow me to repost some snippets from my original post, so that you may understand how irrationally hostile you are being towards me in particular.

Me:

To be honest, whilst I do feel that it is biologically unnatural - everyone has the right to do whatever they want. Besides, by the same argument we're all guilty of behaving in unnatural manners to some extent. Whose to say worshipping a God or supporting a football team that has no players from your city, or having any sort of particular taste in food, is natural?

There's no point having 'beliefs' on the subject, whats there to believe in? I got a big problem with people who 'believe' in things without rationally coming to their conclusions. If it doesn't cause you any immediate suffering then whatever, it doesn't matter - let them be.

You:

Another person who did not read any of the research that I linked to, nor did any research on their own. Did I say that the dolphins were "gay". I said homosexual behavior. These animals are not in the minority of their population, they are in the majority of their population. Most of the males do this. And as far as has been observed ALL of the animals in some species.

I have read about this already, I suggested you present some facts, substantiated by evidence rather than claims. There is a difference.

Just because an animal engaged in homosexual behavior, has oral, anal, sex with an animal of the same gender does not mean that that animal doesn't reproduce. You are not being logical here.

I'm not being logical here? What you are referring to is bi-sexuality, not homosexuality. If an animal engages exclusively in homosexual behaviour, then the animal doesn't reproduce. If engages in sexual intercourse with both genders, it isn't strictly a homosexual as far as I am aware.

I'm talking about something that has been shown scientifically, something that you apparently have not read much about seeing as you actually believe that homosexuality in a majority of a species could lead to it's extinction. I already mentioned this, but it's been shown that these animals engaging in homosexual sex actually had BENEFITS for the species as a whole. Seriously bugs me to try and have a scientific conversation of fact with someone who keep trying to bring lies and half truths into the conversation. Seriously, don't do it, you only make yourself look ignorant.

Where are your 'scientific facts'? Once again, you are making claims. If every member of a species was exclusively a homosexual, they would die out. I never claimed any of my views were the truth, they are my opinions. Once again, you are making bold claims that these are scientific truths - substantiate your findings. I have read briefly about this before, but you are mixing everything up.

Simply put you can say this because you don't have to deal with ignorant bastards your whole life and don't know what it's like. Reminds me of white people when they say that black people are too sensitive over race. Or some dude telling a woman to "get over" the sexism she had to put up with all the time. Honestly, the privileged folk seem to get so worked up when anyone points out their ignorance, homosexuality, racism, sexism, etc. as if it's their god given right to treat other people like half people and call them names. Well, your perfectly free to do this and have your opinion under the constitution, but just don't be surprised when you get people standing up for themselves.

You have proven my point. Now I'm a 'name caller'? I said its ok for homosexuals to do what they do, this is obvious. Barking up the wrong tree. And mate, I've been subjected to a great deal of prejudice and intolerance in my life, for all sorts of reasons - don't go telling me about it. Many people have been. When I see the behavioural patterns you have mentioned I pity the ignorance of the aggressors and move on. If someone tells me they don't have a problem with me, why would I insult them and accuse them of being 'privileged' racists or whatever? Don't victimise yourself to me, I was standing up for homosexuals. Redirect your anger.

Not flimsy research. Accepted fact. Proven observation. Again, I'm not going to take your word for it, because you've already shown (above and below) that you haven't educated yourself on the subject.

Erm.. you are the one making a claim here, not me. Therefore the burden of proof is on you. I think you have misunderstood the concept of a fact, you need to substantiate it with evidence. I've done precursory reading on the the subject but I'm certainly no specialist. Seeing as you are so well educated in the matter, present your findings as facts, substantiate them.

Again admitting that you are either too lazy to do the research, I even gave you a link. Too lazy to click on it? or willful ignorance? I don't know, but I shouldn't have to spoon feed the information to you, I'm assuming that you are a big boy and knows how to use the googles himself.

I opened your link. Why don't you read it? It doesn't reinforce your claims very well. Provide some quotes that do, if you disagree. See above.

you just make fun of my facts. But go ahead, I challenge you to prove that homosexuality is not found in nature (you've already asserted that it's unnatural, so I'm taking that to the bank, prove it)

With regards to your use of the word facts, see above. I never claimed that homosexuality is not found in nature, I said that it seems to conflict with our natural drive to reproduce. I did not negate it as a result of that.

I could care less actually what you think of gay people. To me you'd either be one of the ignorant that hate us, or one of the ones that support us.

I seem to recall saying I have no problem with it, you have my full support in pursuing whatever makes you happy. It is quite ironic that it seems you are, in fact, the intolerant one in this situation.

It's an accepted fact that the vast majority of certain species' males or females practice homosexuality (again, not just a fluke, or a "rogue" few animals). It's an accepted fact that this behavior is not a detriment, but an enhancement to their survival (all you have to do is see the fact that the species is here, alive, on planet earth, in large numbers. to know that. duh.)

'Duh' yeah? Proof that your facts and logic are flawless. Explain scientifically how instead of blaming me for your own inadequacies, prove the correlation if you care so much about doing so.

Take this advice to heart, I am not here to debate with you - one final time, all together everyone! Here we go:

I am on your side. You are barking up the wrong tree.

Have fun with your 'scientific facts'. I hope you succeed in convincing them haters, buddy!

theRhenn

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 03:53 PM
link

Ok, lets play.

Originally posted by meeneecat
Hate to break it to you but, even have a "gut feeling" humans have instinct too, as much as you want to try to separate yourself from animals, we are more like them than most people want to believe...it's not all about "reasoning and choice". The reason that we don't eat food when it smells bad is out of instinct...same with animals. We use our sense of smell and can tell in an instant, rather then reading the expiration date and using "logic" and possibly getting it wrong. (since dates can be misleading, the product could have been stored wrong etc.) Instinct is just as an important part of our survival as intelligence, to try to discount one for the other would be plain ignorant. We use instinct all the time, when we pick a partner (why are we attracted to some and not others, for example = instinct), when we eat (example already given), and we use our instincts all the time when we move around in the world. So you say just because "animals do them" doesn't necessarily mean humans should do them, well yes, but then again, the opposite is also true "just because animals do certain things doesn't mean humans should do these things also". Animals hunt, doesn't mean that humans shouldn't hunt too. Logically here you are tying two really unrelated things together, combined with some omission of facts (that animal use instinct and humans use reasoning, except that humans also use instinct) and trying to argue that X is therefor true. Doesn't work..

Never said humans did not have instinct. We tend to use logic more than instinct, more than likely because we dont carry clubs anymore. But again, I never said we didnt have instinct. Do animals use logic? You'd have to show me some serious proof here. More so than animals mimicking the actions of people. Monkey See Monkey Do... Ring a bell?

Fruits and Veggies are similar, but they are entirely diffrent. The only real similarity we share other than the fact that we're carbon based life forms, is that we live on the same planet, we breath the same air, yadda yadda. Last I checked, I dont walk on all 4's. Look, you can compare yourself to an animal all day if you like. If you want to subvert down to a non reasoning creature, by all means, be my guest. It still doesnt mean you're a primate or anything similar to a dog. If we were animals in the same sense, how in the world are we not doing the same odd things that animals do? Just because you find some similarities in two totaly diffrent things, it does not mean we are the same. If you want to consider yourself such, hey.. I'll call you a witless, instinctual subspecies if you so desire. You'll never hear me, a thinking, reasoning, constructive, ever learning, ever solving species, consider myself something less than what I am. Sorry. You sprung a few leaks there.

The reason we dont eat food when it smells bad isnt instinct. It smells bad and we know it's capable of killing you if it's rotten. Animals do not. Many animals can eat these things because they have immunities that can filter the bad stuff out. If you dont eat something because it smells bad, it's probably because you know you will find it distasteful or it will make you sick. Yet, I can take the same food and feed it to a dog, and in most cases, they will gobble it up. Why do dogs and cats drink antifreeze? It's like sugar water to them, yet it will kill them. We dont drink it because we KNOW it will kill us. If 5 animals all drink from the same ditch and one drops dead from it, do you really think that the other 4 will stop drinking from it? Surely they must have seen that their companion drank from it and died. Why would they do so still? Humans would reason that something is wrong with the water. Still leaking...

We dont pick partners based on instinct. We pick partners based on looks and other selfish, materialistic desires.

ya know what... I think I'll stop here. I just cant go on with this. I would be here all day long picking all the issues that's wrong in your "reasoning". Maybe you are purely instinct. Hot Damn!!! We found the missing link!

This is just silly and your explinations are too. Gays are as they are because animals do it, so should we. LOL

Really???

theRhenn

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link

Originally posted by meeneecat
And you have just proven yourself to be far more ignorant than any animal will ever be. (also learn to spell check, it's not that hard)

I had to add this..

I've proven myself ignorant huh? You specialise in this? Or are you using instinct again?

Look buddy, frankly, you arnt important enuf for me to use a spellchecker in my responce to you. I think Ive spent enough time writting the responce. If U # figer it ought, then maybee u got tu think mor liek an aminal. Maybe your instinct didnt kick in like it should. Oh wait.. That would be reasoning skills!

misterbananas

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link

reply to post by mizbeach40

hey mizbeach40, it's only a small portion of the people on ATS that are ignorant and homophobic, I Don't see what people think is so wrong about gay people, and the way you sounded is like you are born gay, but it actually is a choice, you tried to be straight, but you don't like men so you can't pretend to be that way. You shouldn't listen to the people who put you down, they don't think right.

misterbananas

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link

reply to post by meeneecat

"Again, you are continuing with the same line of reasoning." - meeneecat. I Thought you said humans don't have reasoning, Well that is what you stated earlier.

auraelium

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link

Live and let live!!

If some one gay,so what ? It dont affect me ,it shouldnt affect anybody else.I think the whole world needs a lesson in free will!
I think its the world we live in today,everyone is so worried about what everyone else is doing with their lives,that they havent got time to live there own!

nekomata111

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link

I don't care about people choice, but I don't like the homosexuality so in mainstream nowadays, I WAS BORN that way, and if someone tried to turn me into the homo idea I would have homicidal thoughts too

edit on 14-3-2011 by nekomata111 because: (no reason given)

loagun

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link

Originally posted by nekomata111
I don't care about people choice, but I don't like the homosexuality so in mainstream nowadays, I WAS BORN that way, and if someone tried to turn me into the homo idea I would have homicidal thoughts too

edit on 14-3-2011 by nekomata111 because: (no reason given)

oh god, please don't associate Lady Gaga to homosexual's.... the only thing she represents is bad stereotyping and drag queen fashion.

Annee

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link

Originally posted by loagun

Originally posted by nekomata111
I don't care about people choice, but I don't like the homosexuality so in mainstream nowadays, I WAS BORN that way, and if someone tried to turn me into the homo idea I would have homicidal thoughts too

edit on 14-3-2011 by nekomata111 because: (no reason given)

oh god, please don't associate Lady Gaga to homosexual's.... the only thing she represents is bad stereotyping and drag queen fashion.

Yeah?!?! And what exactly do you know? So she has a schtick. So what.

My kid has worked with her - - and she happens to be very down to earth and real.

iWokeUp

posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link

reply to post by Annee

Well said !!

meeneecat

posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:20 PM
link

Ok pal, this is my last reply to you. I am on your side. I said its ok to be gay.
Trust me, if you read this with an open mind and direct your arguments at those who disagree, you will learn how to better present your findings on this forum.However, first allow me to repost some snippets from my original post, so that you may understand how irrationally hostile you are being towards me in particular.

Didn't I already say that I have no argument with your opinion. I could care less what you think of me or anyone else. But for some reason you keep injecting this into the conversation as if it matters. Please provide sources for your assertion that homosexuality is unnatural and that in animal species like bonobos and dolphins that homosexual behavior is in the minority.

To be honest, whilst I do feel that it is biologically unnatural - everyone has the right to do whatever they want. ....There's no point having 'beliefs' on the subject, whats there to believe in? I got a big problem with people who 'believe' in things without rationally coming to their conclusions. If it doesn't cause you any immediate suffering then whatever, it doesn't matter - let them be.

Again, why are you repeating this over and over again to me. My response to your post had nothing to do with your opinion, how open minded you think you are or what you think of gay people, why do you keep trying to change the subject and skirt around the issue. And yeah, I also have a problem with people that believe things without rationally coming to their conclusions. So how did you come to the conclusion that homosexuality is unnatural? How did you come to the conclusion that this behavior is only done by a small minority of dolphins, bonobos, etc.?

I'm not being logical here? What you are referring to is bi-sexuality, not homosexuality. If an animal engages exclusively in homosexual behavior, then the animal doesn't reproduce. If engages in sexual intercourse with both genders, it isn't strictly a homosexual as far as I am aware.

False, the terms bi-sexuality and homosexuality are terms used to describe an identity used in the LGBT community, it also describes a behavior. If you talk to some lesbians, you will find that a majority have also had sex with men at some point in their lives. Many have also have "reproduced" through insemination. This however does not mean that they aren't still "gay" nor does it mean that they are bi-sexual. Animals on the other hand don't use social constructs to define themselves as who they are, so we can only look at behavior. I don't know if you noticed or not but throughout my posts I have used the term "homosexual behavior" when referring to animals. I'm not concerned about applying an identity "gay", "lesbian", "bi-sexual" or "straight" to an animal because animals don't have socially constructed identities. Even so, this changes nothing, just because a male animal may mate with a female at some point during his life in order to produce offspring, doesn't mean he also doesn't engage in homosexual sex the rest of the time. It's the behavior we are interested in, and animals show us that sex among same genders does occur frequently in nature.

You have proven my point. Now I'm a 'name caller'? I said its ok for homosexuals to do what they do, this is obvious. Barking up the wrong tree. And mate, I've been subjected to a great deal of prejudice and intolerance in my life, for all sorts of reasons - don't go telling me about it. Many people have been. When I see the behavioural patterns you have mentioned I pity the ignorance of the aggressors and move on. If someone tells me they don't have a problem with me, why would I insult them and accuse them of being 'privileged' racists or whatever? Don't victimise yourself to me, I was standing up for homosexuals. Redirect your anger.

What's your point again? Because you still haven't given any sources for your claims. And I never called you a "name caller", but you did however refer to homosexuality as "unnatural", and this, I believe is ignorant and uninformed (again, what's your basis for believing this, through all your talk and talk and talk, you have still not been able to back this up) like I said, don't be so surprised when people stand up for themselves when you say something ignorant about them. I never claimed to play the victim card, in fact I didn't even mention my personal hardships...I was talking about whole entire groups of people when I referred to decades upon centuries of oppression and violence. Why is it so hard to understand that these groups have the right to defend themselves, and will, when something ignorant is said about them? But you claim that these groups are playing "victim" when I point out decades of constitutionally denied rights? When I point out the systematic bias present in "justice" system? When I point out the fact that entire groups of people are systematically denied equal pay because of gender and race? No, that's not playing the victim card, bub, that's pointing out legitimate injustices, and the first step to fixing them is pointing out what they are and standing up for oneself. How is that so difficult to see? Why do you have such a problem with it? And by the way, I don't know what you have faced personally, but everyone has to deal with crap in their life...Let me just point out though that there is a difference between having to deal with hardships that life throws at you (like divorce, health problems etc.) and the systematic discrimination that minorities face everyday simply based on things like skin color, gender, sexual orientation etc. One is caused by a system of injustices, based on decades and centuries of bias, hate & violence specifically designed to keep a certain group of people down, the other is not, the other is essentially random. It's the difference between murder and genocide. One is basically random, the other is systematic and targeted designed to destroy a particular group of people...neither is good, but you are comparing apples and oranges when you attempt to compare your hardships with those of blacks, gays, women, natives, etc.

Erm.. you are the one making a claim here, not me. Therefore the burden of proof is on you. I think you have misunderstood the concept of a fact, you need to substantiate it with evidence.

Yeah, in case you don't remember I was responding to YOUR post. You were the one that didn't back up your assertion and I provided information to the contrary in my response....remember you were the one that first brought up the subject, you were the one making the initial claim. Also, I already told you this once, but if you need me to point it out again, I gave you a link that talks about research into this as a starting point assuming that you could take it from there and do some of your own research if you still had doubts/questions...I assumed wrong. I'm sorry you need to be spoon fed the information, but since you are unable/unwilling to do it on your own, I'll bite.

General Wiki article on homosexual behavior (good starting point):
en.wikipedia.org...

List of some known homosexual species:
en.wikipedia.org...

2 Articles regarding Olso Museums Homosexuality in Nature exhibit:
www.nhm.uio.no...
www.nhm.uio.no...

Hyena Research by Dr. Kay Holekamp
www.msu.edu...

NatGeo article, say 75% of bonobo sex is non reproductive and nearly all engage in homosexual behavior:
news.nationalgeographic.com...

Article headline says 1,500 animal species practices homosexual behavior:
www.news-medical.net...

Study on homosexuality in male rams
endo.endojournals.org...

Article covers a variety of species
news.softpedia.com...

Research by Nathan Bailey; University of California
www.cell.com...
www.cell.com...

Article talks about homosexual behavior being present in nearly all species
www.sciencedaily.com...

Covers a variety of species, including dolphins
www.queerty.com...

Some previews of books on the subject from google books
books.google.com...:+Diversity,+Gender+and+Sexuality+in+Nature+and+People&sig=A d1qPC7sJrpnE0eVcMN6bm0nfy8#v=onepage&q&f=false

books.google.com...=onepage&q&f=false

books.google.com...

Let's see is that enough sources for you, a mix of both primary and secondary...because I can certainly get you loads more.

I opened your link. Why don't you read it? It doesn't reinforce your claims very well. Provide some quotes that do, if you disagree.

Yeah I read it, and again it was meant as a start, a point to start off some discussion and hopefully something that would motivate people to ask some questions and do their own research (apparently not you though)...and just because you "disagree" with something doesn't mean that makes it untrue.

With regards to your use of the word facts, see above. I never claimed that homosexuality is not found in nature, I said that it seems to conflict with our natural drive to reproduce. I did not negate it as a result of that.

Are you changing what you said now? Okay, that's interesting...because I believe your words were "I do feel that it is biologically unnatural" and no where in that post do you mention anything about reproduction. And even if you do go ahead and change what you meant suddenly to mean "it's unnatural with regards to reproduction" it still wouldn't matter, gay people have kids all the time, being gay doesn't preclude oneself from having a child nor wanting to have a child. Sexual orientation is different from the desire to produce offspring. Animals that engage in homosexual behavior also reproduce (actually some species do, and some don't). So if you are going to change what you meant by "unnatural" you still need to prove that "homosexuality is unnatural" regarding reproduction. Source please. What research was done on this? You still have yet to back up your claim...and frankly I'm sick of repeating myself. There's also the little part where you claimed that "homosexual behavior in animals was in the minority" and implied that if it wasn't than the animals would die off (it was specifically in reference to my comment on dolphins & bonobos). Again where's your sources...I'm tired of repeating myself.

I could care less actually what you think of gay people. To me you'd either be one of the ignorant that hate us, or one of the ones that support us.

I seem to recall saying I have no problem with it, you have my full support in pursuing whatever makes you happy. It is quite ironic that it seems you are, in fact, the intolerant one in this situation..

This whole post has been nothing but you skirting my calls for you to back up what you said! Seriously, why do you keep doing that, do you just have nothing? no proof? nothing? than it's just nothing more than a conjecture you pulled out of yer bum...c'mon, I want to proof of what you are saying. And also, Intolerant of what? To accept your "unnatural" assertion just because you say so? to accept something that I know to be false? well sorry, I'm not the type of person to blindly accept what people tell me at face value. Furthermore, if someone is spreading half-truths and lies, I'm going to correct him on it. Nothing at all to do with "tolerance".

I am on your side. You are barking up the wrong tree.

Nothing to do with your opinion on gay people. Your opinion is your opinion which you are entitled to have. You are not however (to quote the famous line) entitled to your own facts. The tree I'm barking at is the one where you are supposed to provide some proof for your assertions. I find it telling that no matter how many times I ask, you have yet to do so...instead you avoid it by averting attention away from the issue and on inane points like my supposed "intolerance" or "inability to be open-minded". And the answer why you haven't yet provided any citations is becoming glaringly obvious.

Have fun with your 'scientific facts'. I hope you succeed in convincing them haters, buddy!

You are guilty of 2 of Stanton Friedman 4 rules of debunking (interview):
2. Don't bother with the facts because my minds already made up
3. If you can't attack the data, attack the people it's easier

-peace

meeneecat

posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link

Originally posted by misterbananas
reply to post by meeneecat

"Again, you are continuing with the same line of reasoning." - meeneecat. I Thought you said humans don't have reasoning, Well that is what you stated earlier.

Can you read? I said humans use instinct all the time in ADDITION to reasoning. Seriously, sometimes it's like some people here didn't get past a 3rd grade level of education in school (not everyone, just a select few, like that idiot who, earlier today, asserted that alien dolphins caused the japan tsunami, maybe misterbanana man should go hang out with him)

Badgered1

posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link

I'm not gay.
I don't practice a belief system based on Bronze age allegorical stories.
I don't care if you are gay. I don't care if you are any religion.
I'm who I am, and you are who you are. There are differences in the world and I embrace them.
Otherwise we'd all look, act, and speak the same.
That would be seriously boring.
I like diversity.
I despise intolerance.
Well, apart from stupidity. I can't stand that!
Unfortunately, there's a lot of stupidity about.
It's really very unsettling.
I'm thankful that there are people in the world with differing lifestyles to mine.
It's an opportunity to learn.
Learn something new every day, and that's 365 new things a year.
Embrace them.
Learn how to live with people who have a different point of view.
It isn't difficult.
Well, unless you're stupid.
In which case, there's really no hope for you.
By the way, stupidity isn't the same as naivety. Stupidity is having sense and failing to use it.
This failure can be attributed to many things. Bigotry, intolerance, and blind allegiance amongst many.
Most of the time what you are experiencing with negativity is stupidity.
Good luck to you. It sounds like you're happy!
That really is more than many can claim.