• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are Gay People "Abnormal"?

Are gay people "abnormal"?


  • Total voters
    91
Yes, to be gay is wrong and abnormal. It is a deviation from nature. Natural reproduction is an essential part of life. Gays can only reproduce with the help of laboratories, which are abnormal, anti-natural and artificial. Natural reproduction can only take place between a man and a woman.

This lifestyle should not be encouraged. Enough damage has been done already. Younger generations are born soft because they lead a lyfestyle imposed by a society that has become overtly gay in all its expressions and forms. We need to fight this mentality if we want life to have a future.
 
Originally Posted by Alfons
The biggest problem is that homosexuals literally push their abnormality to mentally sound people.

Homosexuals know that their are ill, therefore they want to transform entirely society to a mentally hospital.

5741 years long in all countries by all peoples homosexuality was considered as mentally illness and sin, but today homosexual mafia
claims that homosexuality is not only fine but also better as normal sexual behavior. That is abhorrent.




Perhaps, but it is what happens when two opposing sides meet and neither will give in to the other or compormise.

I would never compromise with cannibals.

Especially if they are really hungry.
 
Then why hasn't the human race become extinct? Homosexuality has been around for thousands of years. How can something that has been around for thousands of years be "abnormal"?

Good point!
 
Иосиф Сталин;1059463497 said:
Yes, to be gay is wrong and abnormal. It is a deviation from nature. Natural reproduction is an essential part of life. Gays can only reproduce with the help of laboratories, which are abnormal, anti-natural and artificial. Natural reproduction can only take place between a man and a woman.

This lifestyle should not be encouraged. Enough damage has been done already. Younger generations are born soft because they lead a lyfestyle imposed by a society that has become overtly gay in all its expressions and forms. We need to fight this mentality if we want life to have a future.

This is why it is good to read threads before posting in them.

1) I am the child of a gay person, and no laboratories where involved. This has been mentioned in this thread, and right off the bat destroys your argument.

2) Also pointed out in this thread is the difference between being gay, and gay actions. It is not just possible, but surprisingly common for gays to have hetero sex, and straits to have gay sex.

3) Gays have lived a lifestyle that is anything but soft.
 
This is why it is good to read threads before posting in them.

1) I am the child of a gay person, and no laboratories where involved. This has been mentioned in this thread, and right off the bat destroys your argument.

2) Also pointed out in this thread is the difference between being gay, and gay actions. It is not just possible, but surprisingly common for gays to have hetero sex, and straits to have gay sex.

3) Gays have lived a lifestyle that is anything but soft.

How can anything a man and a woman do together sexually be considered homosexual?
 
How can anything a man and a woman do together sexually be considered homosexual?

That's not what Redress was saying, Dan. S/he said that it is possible for straight people to have gay sex and perform gay acts, and that it is not uncommon.
 
When broken down into neuroscience, choice is simply a fancy way of saying the ability to regulate attention. Are you suggesting that people must ignore that which sexually arouses them if it doesn't comply with what you believe should sexually arouse them? As I recall Jesus said to even look at another and lust for them is akin to adultery. Christianity has always sounded an awful lot like mind control to me.

But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Matthew 5:27 (NIV)

Sounds more like self-control.
 
That's not what Redress was saying, Dan. S/he said that it is possible for straight people to have gay sex and perform gay acts, and that it is not uncommon.

It is possible for a man and a woman to have sex that does not lead to children, but that is not "gay sex." It's still a man and a woman interacting sexually.
 
It is possible for a man and a woman to have sex that does not lead to children, but that is not "gay sex." It's still a man and a woman interacting sexually.

no no no, that's not the point. It is possible for STRAIGHTS to perform homosexual acts. Think prison.
 
no no no, that's not the point. It is possible for STRAIGHTS to perform homosexual acts. Think prison.

Oh. The way it was written, "straits have gay sex" I thought he was talking about a man and a woman (straits) together.

It's been a long day.

I'm not here. Carry on.
 
Bull****.....do some people like asparagus because they have no control over their tastes or because they made a decision that they like it? We all have the same tastebuds afterall. You sell the human brain short when you say we have no control over our likes and dislikes. I suppose you would relegate us all to the status of chimps or gorillas.

We don't all have the same tastebuds.

Supertaster Test | Are You a Supertaster?

There is an "average" number of tastebuds that some people have and other people that have either significantly fewer or significantly more tastebuds than that average have very different tastes than most people. Actual "taste" is influenced highly by how many tastebuds a person has, not by the any choice a person has in what they like and don't like.
 
So you have control over these....preferences?

mac... just so you know, you are confusing preferences and acting on preferences. SB's preference may be for green. That doesn't mean he has to act on this preference by wearing green. One may be heterosexual or homosexual. That does not mean that they have to ACT on this preference. Doesn't change the preference, however.

Always remember. There is a difference between the state of being or the preference and acting on the preference. When you confuse the two concepts, you tend to get in trouble with your argument.
 
Because I evaluated writing styles and made a conscious decision on that which I liked, and that which I did not like.

Describe the process of this conscious decision on what you liked and did not like in detail, please.
 
Last edited:
mac... just so you know, you are confusing preferences and acting on preferences. SB's preference may be for green. That doesn't mean he has to act on this preference by wearing green. One may be heterosexual or homosexual. That does not mean that they have to ACT on this preference. Doesn't change the preference, however.

No, I'm not. What I was doing was trying to get him to explain his position a little better.

Always remember. There is a difference between the state of being or the preference and acting on the preference. When you confuse the two concepts, you tend to get in trouble with your argument.

I agree, I'm not disputeing the difference between feeling and doing...
 
That would indicate that she did not figure out what she was until then. She is 66, back then not only was the social pressure to marry and pump out kids was huge, and no one talked about orientation.

Ok, gotcha. Was just curious, thanks for elaborating.
 
Describe the process of this conscious decision on what you liked and did not like in detail, please.

Ok, I'll give it a shot:

As I've grown and "matured" I've met..let's say...thousands of people that all have had distinct personalities, but many of which have overlapping qualities. I've come to learn that certain mannerisms and activities are indicitive of aspects of a persons personality. I've noticed that there are people who are very concerned with exhibiting intelligence (and that these people are generally not of anything more than average intelligence) and do so with use of "big" or obscure words. People that do this in writing, or are overly detailed and verbose, irritate and bore me.

I pick writers cusch as Steinbeck and Card because they are relatively concise and humble in their writing styles. This is a conscious decision on my part. There is no mystery to it.
 
Last edited:
Ok, I'll give it a shot:

As I've grown and "matured" I've met..let's say...thousands of people that all have had distinct personalities, but many of which have overlapping qualities. I've come to learn that certain mannerisms and activities are indicitive of aspects of a persons personality. I've noticed that there are people who are very concerned with exhibiting intelligence (and that these people are generally not of anything more than average intelligence) and do so with use of "big" or obscure words. People that do this in writing, or are overly detailed and verbose, irritate and bore me.

I pick writers cusch as Steinbeck and Card because they are relatively concise and humble in their writing styles. This is a conscious decision on my part. There is no mystery to it.

So why do you choose to let certain people bore you?
 
Yes, absolutely. Sometimes, when it feels comfortable to talk about, I approach the topic of why a leftie holds the pen in an awkward fashion, rather than simply a mirror image of a right-hander.

I've learned to hold a pen as a mirror image, but that requires me to be very picky in the pen that I use.

I buy "Lefty" pens for my son if he has to do a lot of writing. The way that lefties have to contort their hands to write from left to right always looks really uncomfortable to me.
 
I don't. I choose to ignore those that do in favor of those that don't.

So to answer his question, you didn't make a choice to let certain people bore you, but once you realized that they did bore you, you made a choice to ignore them, right?
 
Back
Top Bottom