• 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!

Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

Is homosexuality "normak" and "natural"?

  • Total voters
    116
Gathomas88 said:
....................
Click to expand...

We have a tendency to go off into the bushes. This whole discussion boils down to something much more simple than all those rambling posts.

It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if it's not the brand of sexuality that is most commonly practiced.
It does not matter if it's done just for pleasure.
It doesn't matter if it is not as your god intended.
None of that matters. The only thing that matters is if it makes them happy and that it does not hurt anyone innocent. Check and check.

Any argument anyone has with it is based purely in their own self interest because they want their world to stay tiny and strictly defined and in order to pull that off they need everyone else to be defined by the very limited terms they have allowed in that tiny little world.
 
Redress said:
I am not asking about morality. That is a different question and one that requires a value judgement. Normal and natural should be questions that can be answered objectively.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that one? When morality is void how can you achieve a valued judgment?

Homosexuality has been around as long as prostitution as well as a number of other topics of sex. But without a moral compass all could be made to be "natural" or "nomak"

edit- are you willing to go that far?
 
Last edited:
chromium said:
I don't know what makes people attracted to certain individuals or body types, but thinking of how some insist they only like certain races for example, social conditioning could be a factor. I don't know that it's as determined at birth as attraction to gender.
Click to expand...

It seems rather unlikely that it wouldn't be, especially considering how closely the human attraction to certain physical features can be shown to objective correlate with fertility and virility.

Depends what you compare it to. Your list (dwarfism, autism) and i could add plenty others like blind or deaf, might contribute to human diversity like i argued, but those traits are what i'd call inherently harmful. They always make life more difficult and how the rest of us respond to them - no matter how kind or accepting - doesn't change that. We can work to make it less difficult, but not so it's 100% the same as being free of that condition.

From experience i can tell you being homosexual isn't like that. Whatever difficulty comes from society not accepting it, "for no reason" i would argue - thus that is what needs to change. In a hateful environment as a minor, it was difficult but again the harm comes from others being haters. In accepting environment, it's really no more difficult. The difference between the two was vast and immediately obvious. Homophobia is what needs to be cured.
Click to expand...

As I said before, the question of "harm" can be rather subjective in this case.

I've got a few conditions myself which I would have much rather been born without if I was given the choice. For instance, I was born with mild Scoliosis, which might very well be indicative of a more mild form of undiagnosed Marfan Syndrome.

Has it ever affected my quality of life? Not really.

Is it even especially noticeable? No. Not even the Army docs noticed it during my enlisted physical (which is the only reason I got in).

However, I'd really rather not have it all the same. :shrug:

What is the useful function to being blue eyed? It is actually statistically abnormal. How about the elderly? They are abnormal and lack function once they reach a certain point. Guess we better off them all huh

If you only cared for 'objective value' like a socialist or something, that would be one thing. I doubt that all your beliefs align with what's "best" for the species as a whole. Else you'd favor aborting down syndrome fetus, sterilizing drug addict or simply poor mothers, and so on. There is a long list of human failures and inconveniences that are largely preventable and less harmful than homosexuality.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that aging wouldn't be one of the first things on the chopping block? :lol:

I'm not saying that Homosexuality is the "root of all evil" here. Far from it. It's basically irrelevant on the whole.

However, that being said, there's still no real reason why it should have to exist. It's just an anomaly.
 
Last edited:
opendebate said:
We have a tendency to go off into the bushes. This whole discussion boils down to something much more simple than all those rambling posts.

It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if it's not the brand of sexuality that is most commonly practiced.
It does not matter if it's done just for pleasure.
It doesn't matter if it is not as your god intended.
None of that matters. The only thing that matters is if it makes them happy and that it does not hurt anyone innocent. Check and check.

Any argument anyone has with it is based purely in their own self interest because they want their world to stay tiny and strictly defined and in order to pull that off they need everyone else to be defined by the very limited terms they have allowed in that tiny little world.
Click to expand...

Well, I agree with that, but the question is, is it natural and normal?
 
Gathomas88 said:
It seems rather unlikely that it wouldn't be especially considering how closely the human attraction to certain physical features correlates with fertility and virility.



As I said before, the question of "harm" can be rather subjective in this case.

I've got a few conditions myself which I would have much rather been born without, if I was given the choice. For instance, I was born with mild Scoliosis, which might very well translate into a more mild form of undiagnosed Marfan Syndrome.

Has it ever effected my quality of life? Not really.

Is it even especially noticeable? No. Not even the Army docs noticed it during my enlisted physical (which is the only reason I got in).

However, I'd really rather not have it all the same. :shrug:



What makes you think that aging wouldn't be one of the first things on the chopping block? :lol:

I'm not saying that Homosexuality is the "root of all evil" here. Far from it. It's basically irrelevant on the whole.

However, that being said, there's still no real reason why it should have to exist. It's just an anomaly.
Click to expand...

I think that some people are just wired a bit differently, so for them it does exist. I've got nothing against them. Live and let live.
 
ChrisL said:
I think that some people are just wired a bit differently, so for them it does exist. I've got nothing against them. Live and let live.
Click to expand...

True. It's not like I'm suggesting that we go out and put all the homosexuals to death here or anything. I don't really care what anyone does, within reason.

I'm simply looking at the issue from a scientific / medical standpoint. Like it or not, if it were possible to keep children from being born homosexual in the first place, I think a lot of parents would opt to do exactly that.

I know I would.

It'd simply make things easier for them, and easier for society in general.
 
Gathomas88 said:
True. It's not like I'm suggesting that we go out and put all the homosexuals to death here or anything. I don't really care what anyone does, within reason.

I'm simply looking at the issue from a scientific / medical standpoint. Like it or not, if it were possible to keep children from being born homosexual in the first place, I think a lot of parents would opt to do exactly that.

I know I would.

It'd simply make things easier for them, and easier for society in general.
Click to expand...

That's true in that no parent would want their child to have to suffer in any way. I also wonder how many people are just confused about their sexuality for whatever reasons and are not truly homosexuals. I'm quite sure that is the case in some instances.
 
Gathomas88 said:
The simple answer here is that nature just isn't that efficient.

Genes, in at least some fashion, want to perpetuate themselves. For whatever reason, they always have, and they always will.

However, this doesn't mean that they we, as organisms, are consciously aware of that fact. It is hardwired into us as a matter of basic instinct instead.

When you alter the environmental circumstances those instincts were adapted to recognize (by adding artificial birth control into the mix, for instance), the system simply doesn't know how to react.

As far as your body is concerned, it is doing its part simply by having sex. It doesn't know that the act has basically been rendered futile by the usage of condoms, the pill, or whatever else.
Click to expand...

I agree with that but that does not negate the fact that our consciousness over rides any instinctual aspect of the genes want to perpetuate...
 
ChrisL said:
Like I said, overpopulation is due to advances in medical science that allow us to have much longer life spans and have less maternal/fetal natural deaths. This does not negate the fact that we have sex to reproduce. We don't REALIZE this, but that is why we have sex.
Click to expand...
I am talking about non-human overpopulation. Clearly you completely ignored the links I gave you--and my own post, which explicitly stated that is what I was talking about in my deer example.
 
ChrisL said:
That's true in that no parent would want their child to have to suffer in any way. I also wonder how many people are just confused about their sexuality for whatever reasons and are not truly homosexuals. I'm quite sure that is the case in some instances.
Click to expand...

It's hard to say, especially with how prickly everyone tends to be regarding the subject these days.

I agree that it's probably something that happens though... Every now and then, at least.
 
ChrisL said:
Well, guns have always been pretty much accepted until just recent history. MOST men in the old days carried a weapon. That was the norm.
Click to expand...

No. It was not the norm. That is the misrepresentation of Hollywood. Most men, including most cowboys and men out west, did not carry a gun. Most people, in fact, in the history of the USA, did not carry guns.
 
Lakryte said:
I am talking about non-human overpopulation. Clearly you completely ignored the links I gave you--and my own post, which explicitly stated that is what I was talking about in my deer example.
Click to expand...

When "overpopulation" occurs in nature, the excess individuals simply die off.

Homosexuality isn't involved in any way, shape, or form.
 
Maybe I'm biased but I'm guessing there are more people confused about homosexuality than the other way around. I can't imagine someone with a dick in their mouth being confused. Its not like it just fell in there.


ChrisL said:
That's true in that no parent would want their child to have to suffer in any way. I also wonder how many people are just confused about their sexuality for whatever reasons and are not truly homosexuals. I'm quite sure that is the case in some instances.
Click to expand...
 
ChrisL said:
I also tend to think (and I think I might have read this somewhere and it makes sense) that because children tend to be ANNOYING - LOL - sex feels good and we want to have sex so that we WILL reproduce regardless. Abortions and BC are just methods we use to prevent having the children, but it still does not negate the fact that we were designed to WANT to have sex so that we will reproduce in spite of the annoying children. :lol: J/K, personally I LOVE children, but apparently a lot of people here do not.
Click to expand...

No. We were designed to want to have sex because it feels good. Kids are a by-product. I have no understanding as to why you can't grasp this.

Have you even read my links or posts? Just because you don't realize it does not mean it is not a biological imperative because it is. Without it, human beings would have died out LONG ago. Sex feels good so that you will want to do it in order to reproduce.
Click to expand...

I have already said that people abort and have killed certain offspring over history. These are not isolated either but permeated all cultures. The reason we have kids is because we have sex and want the baby... that is the only reason.
 
TobyOne said:
Maybe I'm biased but I'm guessing there are more people confused about homosexuality than the other way around. I can't imagine someone with a dick in their mouth being confused. Its not like it just fell in there.
Click to expand...

Well... To be fair here, it's not like there aren't more than a few straight out deviants in the world as well.

As far as I'm aware, there's no "orientation" towards having sex with animals. It doesn't stop some people from engaging in exactly that either way regardless. :lol:
 
Bodhisattva said:
I agree with that but that does not negate the fact that our consciousness over rides any instinctual aspect of the genes want to perpetuate...
Click to expand...

So, do you think it is NOT instinctual for you to desire woman and the normal way for a man to be? Do you think homosexual is the way humans were intended to be? If not, then it is not normal nor is it natural. It is something else. Not that there is anything wrong with that! :mrgreen:
 
Gathomas88 said:
Which we accomplish by reproducing. :roll:

This isn't exactly rocket science here. If there aren't any offspring. There isn't a species to begin with.
Click to expand...
As I have pointed out countless times, reproduction is not always beneficial to survival. If there aren't enough resources to sustain a larger population, and the resources are consumed before they can be replenished, the entire population will die. Overpopulation is a biological term that applies to all animals. Refer to my previous post.

Then homosexuality would increase in proportion to population size. It doesn't.

It was a statistical anomaly when our numbers were small. It is still an anomaly today.
Click to expand...
Not relevant to my main point whatsoever, which is the following: Homosexuality occurs in nature and is therefore natural. The argument that reproduction is always a biological imperative is false, for in many cases reproduction may cause more harm than not producing.
 
TobyOne said:
Maybe I'm biased but I'm guessing there are more people confused about homosexuality than the other way around. I can't imagine someone with a dick in their mouth being confused. Its not like it just fell in there.
Click to expand...

Mentally confused. Abused or molested since childhood thus altering their sense of self or worth, changing their ideas of gender identity. That is what she means and not, "gee, how did this dick end up in my mouth" :roll:
 
Bodhisattva said:
No. It was not the norm. That is the misrepresentation of Hollywood. Most men, including most cowboys and men out west, did not carry a gun. Most people, in fact, in the history of the USA, did not carry guns.
Click to expand...

Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about. MOST men hunted and needed to protect themselves and their property, not only against animals but also against other predatory humans.
 
TobyOne said:
Maybe I'm biased but I'm guessing there are more people confused about homosexuality than the other way around. I can't imagine someone with a dick in their mouth being confused. Its not like it just fell in there.
Click to expand...

Bodhisattva said:
Mentally confused. Abused or molested since childhood thus altering their sense of self or worth, changing their ideas of gender identity. That is what she means and not, "gee, how did this dick end up in my mouth" :roll:
Click to expand...

Yes, this is what I mean. :lol: There could be other reasons for the confusion too though.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I agree with that but that does not negate the fact that our consciousness over rides any instinctual aspect of the genes want to perpetuate...
Click to expand...

Consciousness can only direct what nature provided for us in the first place.

Frankly, even then, it's not like our actions are completely our own anyway. Our instincts push us towards certain behaviors and inclinations without our knowledge or consent.

Sexuality is simply one example of exactly that. We have sex because our bodies are trying to reproduce, regardless of whether we are aware of it or not.
 
ChrisL said:
So, do you think it is NOT instinctual for you to desire woman and the normal way for a man to be? Do you think homosexual is the way humans were intended to be? If not, then it is not normal nor is it natural. It is something else. Not that there is anything wrong with that! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Definition of natural:
"existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Homosexuality exists in nature among numerous species and is not caused by humankind. Therefore it is natural. Simple as that.
 
ChrisL said:
So, do you think it is NOT instinctual for you to desire woman and the normal way for a man to be? Do you think homosexual is the way humans were intended to be? If not, then it is not normal nor is it natural. It is something else.
Click to expand...

Homosexuality is natural but not normal. Normal implies the majority.

... and of course it is instinctual that I find hot babes desirable.

Not that there is anything wrong with that! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Seinfeld?
 
Lakryte said:
Definition of natural:
"existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Homosexuality exists in nature among numerous species and is not caused by humankind. Therefore it is natural. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Okay, I can agree with that. It is natural because it is not (as far as we know) caused by any external factors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom