View Poll Results: Is homosexuality "normak" and "natural"?

Voters
144. You may not vote on this poll
  • Homosexuality is normal

    68 47.22%
  • Homosexuality is not normal

    46 31.94%
  • Homosexuality is natural

    92 63.89%
  • Homosexuality is not natural

    19 13.19%
  • Other/unsure

    12 8.33%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 42 of 58 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast
Results 411 to 420 of 574

Thread: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

  1. #411
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,792

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    It depends on how you define your terms. It's natural as it occurs in nature. If you're going to define normal as being true of the average, no, but then again, having blue eyes and being left handed isn't normal by that criteria either. Therefore, I reject that definition and say that it is something that ought to be acceptable, thus normal.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  2. #412
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    It depends on how you define your terms. It's natural as it occurs in nature. If you're going to define normal as being true of the average, no, but then again, having blue eyes and being left handed isn't normal by that criteria either. Therefore, I reject that definition and say that it is something that ought to be acceptable, thus normal.
    I agree it depends on your definition of the terms, which of course, were not defined even when someone else tried to press that point.

    But I would say it is Abnormal (maybe unnatural too) to have desire contrary to evolution's purpose for the design of each gender's respective genitalia obviously intended/fitted for reproduction, and the evolutionary reason for desire as well.

    This is Not comparable to Right/Left-handedness so many have tried, with PC, to trivilialize it with. This is a significant contrary-to-procreation evolutionary purpose/design issue. And I imagine some/many people who are gay, struggle Emotionally with the problem. A problem that people with 'blue eyes' or left-handedness don't remotely have.

    Does it occur in nature, sure. Many physical/sexual variants occur 'in nature'.
    Some people would even label some other politically non-charged or rarer ones 'unnatural', but not in this sensitive and more benign case.

    Which is not to say all people/variants are not deservant of 100% equal societal rights.
    Last edited by mbig; 07-16-14 at 04:54 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  3. #413
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,792

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    But I would say it is Abnormal (maybe unnatural too) to have desire contrary to evolution's purpose for the design of each gender's respective genitalia obviously intended/fitted for reproduction, and the evolutionary reason for desire as well.
    If that was the case, we wouldn't see homosexuality being a factor in many species in nature. Clearly, evolution hasn't edited it out, therefore it is natural. It occurs in nature.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  4. #414
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    If that was the case, we wouldn't see homosexuality being a factor in many species in nature. Clearly, evolution hasn't edited it out, therefore it is natural. It occurs in nature.
    Not so.
    That's not an answer to the the condition's contrariness to the evolutionary design and purpose of sex and sexual organs.
    It's merely stating that it isn't restricted to humans.
    Your PC is overriding your very good science. This is true of the vast majority of similarly smart people.
    Last edited by mbig; 07-16-14 at 05:04 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  5. #415
    Why so un**great?
    DifferentDrummr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Facepalm Beach
    Last Seen
    06-04-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,818
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    I agree it depends on your definition of the terms, which of course, were not defined even when someone else tried to press that point.

    But I would say it is Abnormal (maybe unnatural too) to have desire contrary to evolution's purpose for the design of each gender's respective genitalia obviously intended/fitted for reproduction, and the evolutionary reason for desire as well.
    Consider the closest relative to humans in the animal kingdom: the Bonobo chimp. This critter will have sex with pretty much anything with a pulse. And they've still managed to survive as a species, so it doesn't appear that going beyond intra-species procreation was ever an evolutionary problem.

    This is Not comparable to Right/Left-handedness so many have tried, with PC, to trivilialize it with. This is a significant contrary-to-procreation evolutionary purpose/design issue. And I imagine some/many people who are gay, struggle Emotionally with the problem. A problem that people with 'blue eyes' or left-handedness don't remotely have.
    Many, if not most, gay individuals are not at all repulsed by the opposite gender or are incapable of having sex with them. It's simply not something they're interested in pursuing.
    I fight against the ignorant, irresponsible, and/or closed-minded.
    This group is the worst enemy of America and its freedoms. It includes, but is not limited to, all Trump supporters.

  6. #416
    Guru
    Zinthaniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    09-19-17 @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,705

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    Not so.
    That's not an answer to the the condition's contrariness to the evolutionary design and purpose of sex and sexual organs.
    It's merely stating that it isn't restricted to humans.
    Your PC is overriding your very good science. This is true of the vast majority of similarly smart people.
    Perhaps the problem is the notion that our sexual organs are directly related to our sexuality. Homosexuals can still procreate - their sexuality does not inhibit this. I am a gay man and i can impregnate a woman - including a lesbian. It's evolutionary purpose, seeing as it has not been selected out in a multitude of species, could mean that it served a purpose beyond that of sexual relations.
    Last edited by Zinthaniel; 07-16-14 at 05:52 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    In my own experience here, people seem to ignore a posters professional experience or training if the app pro holds a view that is disagreed with.

  7. #417
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DifferentDrummr View Post
    Consider the closest relative to humans in the animal kingdom: the Bonobo chimp. This critter will have sex with pretty much anything with a pulse. And they've still managed to survive as a species, so it doesn't appear that going beyond intra-species procreation was every an evolutionary problem.
    I don't see the relevance of this argument at all. The evolutionary purpose of sex (and desire for it) is reproduction. If some adolescent High-T Bonobo humps a broomstick.. so what?

    Quote Originally Posted by DifferentDrummer
    Many, if not most, gay individuals are not at all repulsed by the opposite gender or are incapable of having sex with them. It's simply not something they're interested in pursuing.
    Only proving My point.
    They are not only "capable" of having sex with opposite gender, that IS evolution's purpose for !t, and the way the the great majority of All animal species practice it. Necessarily practice it in fact, for the very survival of that species.

    The only debate here is what terms we use for behavior that isn't consistent with Nature/Evolution's obvious intended purpose/design of the genders' respective parts.
    Last edited by mbig; 07-16-14 at 05:56 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  8. #418
    Why so un**great?
    DifferentDrummr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Facepalm Beach
    Last Seen
    06-04-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,818
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    I don't see the relevance of this argument at all. The evolutionary purpose of sex (and desire for it) is reproduction. If some adolescent High-T Bonobo humps a broomstick.. so what?
    The greatest relevance is that nature doesn't seem to have had any need to restrict our sex drive for procreation only.

    Only proving My point.
    They are not only "capable" of having sex with opposite gender, that IS evolution's purpose for !t, and the way the the great majority of All animal species practice it. Necessarily practice it in fact, for the very survival of that species.

    The only debate here is what terms we use for behavior that isn't consistent with Nature/Evolution's obvious intended purpose/design of the genders' respective parts.
    Okay, so, if a hetero couple decides that they don't have the resources to support any (more) children, are they then behaving in a way that isn't consistent with Nature/Evolution's intended purpose by trying not to procreate?
    I fight against the ignorant, irresponsible, and/or closed-minded.
    This group is the worst enemy of America and its freedoms. It includes, but is not limited to, all Trump supporters.

  9. #419
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DifferentDrummr View Post
    The greatest relevance is that nature doesn't seem to have had any need to restrict our sex drive for procreation only.
    We of course "don't have to".. of course without it, no More us. Funny about evolution.
    It gives us 'Natural' desires.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiffrentDrummer
    Okay, so, if a hetero couple decides that they don't have the resources to support any (more) children, are they then behaving in a way that isn't consistent with Nature/Evolution's intended purpose by trying not to procreate?[/b]
    I would refer you to ChrisL's post #386:

    "Yes, well you may have sex because it feels good, but mother nature has her own reasons for sex feeling good. I believe it is designed to feel good so that you will want to do it. Of course, because we are intelligent creatures, we are aware that sex leads to babies, so we use precautions. It's not like it's something you would be aware of anyways. MOST men are attracted to beautiful healthy-looking and young women. There are reasons for this."

    And your replies are Tiresome PC, NOT addressing evolution or the respective genders obviously reciprocal organs and Millions of years of evolution and procreation.
    No one says homosexuality doesn't exist/isn't possible/or is immoral, it's just Contrary to their genders' parts/evolution.
    To this you have No reply- of course...except, like the debater before you, this behavior also exists in other animals.

    So unless there's something meatier forthcoming..
    Last edited by mbig; 07-16-14 at 06:14 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  10. #420
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    As others have pointed out, it all depends on how you want to define the terms. May as well be asking "which definition of 'normal' do you want to use here?"

    In the strictest sense of the word, homosexuality is not the norm, so it is not normal. There can be no denying that "heterosexual sex has been the norm among humans throughout their existence."

    If by normal and natural we simply mean that it occurs in nature, then I think we can all agree that it's not some form of supernatural phenomenon.

Page 42 of 58 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •