• 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
Gay people may or may not be "abnormal" but homosexuality is. If homosexuality were normal, the human species would become extinct.

This is not necessarily true. There are multiple other variables to consider and makes assumptions(homosexuality is exclusive for example) that are not true.
 
original.jpg


I am tired of the reproduction argument... It's not good for everybody to reproduce, and definitely not all the time. Birth control is good for society. Gay adoption is good for society, and this woman's reproductive decisions are "abnormal" and bad for society.
 
This is not necessarily true. There are multiple other variables to consider and makes assumptions(homosexuality is exclusive for example) that are not true.

Yes, it is true. Homosexuality is exclusive, we are messing with the ONLY way for evolution to work. Why do you think 90% of people are heterosexual? It's because it is absolutely necessary for the survival of any species.
 
original.jpg


I am tired of the reproduction argument... It's not good for everybody to reproduce, and definitely not all the time. Birth control is good for society. Gay adoption is good for society, and this woman's reproductive decisions are "abnormal" and bad for society.

Umm. That's disgusting.
 
I am tired of the reproduction argument... It's not good for everybody to reproduce, and definitely not all the time. Birth control is good for society. Gay adoption is good for society, and this woman's reproductive decisions are "abnormal" and bad for society.

I don't get whats abnormal about the women decisions? its not clear to me
 
Yes, it is true. Homosexuality is exclusive, we are messing with the ONLY way for evolution to work. Why do you think 90% of people are heterosexual? It's because it is absolutely necessary for the survival of any species.

Heterosexuality isn't necessary. Fertility is necessary. And now we even live in a world where sex isn't necessary for procreation.
 
Yes, it is true. Homosexuality is exclusive, we are messing with the ONLY way for evolution to work. Why do you think 90% of people are heterosexual? It's because it is absolutely necessary for the survival of any species.

Homosexuality is not exclusive. As an example, I am the child of a gay person. It is not only entirely possible for gay people to have heterosexual sex, it is fairly common.
 
Homosexuality is not exclusive. As an example, I am the child of a gay person. It is not only entirely possible for gay people to have heterosexual sex, it is fairly common.

But it drastically reduces the chances of the total population to reproduce. It's much more rare for a homosexual to reproduce then a heterosexual.
 
Heterosexuality isn't necessary. Fertility is necessary. And now we even live in a world where sex isn't necessary for procreation.

IT IS NECESSARY, tell me ONE species that is majority homosexual and survives?
p.s.- there are some animals that only have one gender so it doesnt count.
 
But it drastically reduces the chances of the total population to reproduce. It's much more rare for a homosexual to reproduce then a heterosexual.

Not as much as you might think. Roughly 1/3 of all gay women have had at least one child, and about 1/4 of all gay men. Furthermore you are making assumptions about birth rates for individuals which is not necessarily true. How many children are gay people going to have, on average in the hypothetical world with homosexuality being "normal"? How many will strait people have? IN the different society, why would you assume the same values?
 
Homosexuals are not deformed people nor are the abnormal physcially any more than heterosexuals the term abnormal is applied to their sexual behavior which is abnormal.
Here is the definition of abnormal :
not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard: abnormal powers of concentration; an abnormal amount of snow; abnormal behavior.

Having same sex is not average, typical or usual for the majority of humans, This isnt even arguable the argument comes from overbearing people that want it the way they want it, with no compromise.

Abnormal behavior in the case of homosexuality is obvious
 
Homosexuals are not deformed people nor are the abnormal physcially any more than heterosexuals the term abnormal is applied to their sexual behavior which is abnormal.
Here is the definition of abnormal :
not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard: abnormal powers of concentration; an abnormal amount of snow; abnormal behavior.

Having same sex is not average, typical or usual for the majority of humans, This isnt even arguable the argument comes from overbearing people that want it the way they want it, with no compromise.

Abnormal behavior in the case of homosexuality is obvious

Would you argue that homosexualtiy is or isnt the way a person defines themselves?

If that is indicative of totality?

We cannot overlook that the incesant, insistant, need to not surrender an argument is abnormal. Agree?
 
Not as much as you might think. Roughly 1/3 of all gay women have had at least one child, and about 1/4 of all gay men. Furthermore you are making assumptions about birth rates for individuals which is not necessarily true. How many children are gay people going to have, on average in the hypothetical world with homosexuality being "normal"? How many will strait people have? IN the different society, why would you assume the same values?
First off you can't compare the situation to modern society, we have kind of made an artificial environment. This is because society can go away in the blink of a second, its not forever, nuclear holocaust can eliminate it instantly resulting to pre-caveman days.

I simply do not agree, i think it is obvious that homosexuality is some kind of developmental error in the original blueprint of our genes. You never answered my questions on whether having born with a third eye , or with no hair, or with purple eyes, or with schizophrenia, is abnormal. These are just as abnormal as homosexuality is... they are just not what the ideal biological human being is programed to have. It is very clear that every aspect of our body has a specific function that helps us survive and our sexual drive is one of them... and homosexuality is NOT one of them.

Homosexuality is abnormal, but its not immoral or bad. They arn't inferior, just different. In my opinion if we had to send Invading aliens a perfect example of the collective gene pool of a normal human being... they would NOT BE GAY.
 
Gay people may or may not be "abnormal" but homosexuality is. If homosexuality were normal, the human species would become extinct.

Then why hasn't the human race become extinct?
Ummm, because it's not normal. If it were normal, the human race would cease to exist.

Homosexuality has been around for thousands of years. How can something that has been around for thousands of years be "abnormal"?
I dunno, some abnormalities endure.

 
Originally Posted by celticwar17
But it drastically reduces the chances of the total population to reproduce. It's much more rare for a homosexual to reproduce then a heterosexual.


Not as much as you might think. Roughly 1/3 of all gay women have had at least one child, and about 1/4 of all gay men. Furthermore you are making assumptions about birth rates for individuals which is not necessarily true. How many children are gay people going to have, on average in the hypothetical world with homosexuality being "normal"? How many will strait people have? IN the different society, why would you assume the same values?

Hypothetically sticky situation... to say the least. No pun intended.

The best science has to offer is a fifty fifty chance with twins as an example. There is a variable I read somewhere that states identical twins can have other variations as profound as finger prints.

Finally, the PC can actually make something that is easier in full, numbers crunching, if the variables entered as stats to start are accurate. The thought hurts my brain.

I do not know if it is a proven fact concerning sexuality, but we have "two brains," the primative, and higher. Sex is performed and desired on both levels.

Women have no control over hormonal fluxuations. Durring estrus for lack of a better word. What to call it seems to be a debated topic as well as the fact that durring it, her sex drive increases. Resulting no doubt in both brains induced with a desire to procreate.

I wonder if there are reliable stats on how many unwavering gay women had a baby due to estrus, with no desire to reproduce in the higher brain beforehand.
 
Last edited:
Ummm, because it's not normal. If it were normal, the human race would cease to exist.


I dunno, some abnormalities endure.

lol wtf I wonder if Marty has had Graves syndrom. It would explain the eyes.
 
Last edited:
But it drastically reduces the chances of the total population to reproduce. It's much more rare for a homosexual to reproduce then a heterosexual.
Exactly the point I'm trying to make. For homosexuals to reproduce, they have to either resort to fertility treatments (a relatively recent procedure) or they have to resort to going against they're natural instinct and have sex with someone of the opposite gender, which I imagine they find as gross as heterosexuals feel about homosexual sex.

That is why my position on this is -- if homosexuality were normal, humankind would have become extinct long ago.
 
I don't get whats abnormal about the women decisions? its not clear to me

It's not a common or normal choice that women make... and she's being unfair to her kids. She can't raise that many kids in her little house. I also some of her kids have special needs. She is a selfish mother by producing that many spawns
 
But it drastically reduces the chances of the total population to reproduce. It's much more rare for a homosexual to reproduce then a heterosexual.

Not reproducing is not a bad thing... Overpopulation can kill us all, besides we have one Nadya Sulemen which is more than enough
 
Not as much as you might think. Roughly 1/3 of all gay women have had at least one child, and about 1/4 of all gay men. Furthermore you are making assumptions about birth rates for individuals which is not necessarily true. How many children are gay people going to have, on average in the hypothetical world with homosexuality being "normal"? How many will strait people have? IN the different society, why would you assume the same values?

I am straight and I don't want to have any kids... I might adopt. Honestly, why have kids and push reproduction when so many children need homes and families? I'll never understand that. I am not hurting society by not reproducing... :roll:
 
Homosexuals are not deformed people nor are the abnormal physcially any more than heterosexuals the term abnormal is applied to their sexual behavior which is abnormal.
Here is the definition of abnormal :
not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard: abnormal powers of concentration; an abnormal amount of snow; abnormal behavior.

Having same sex is not average, typical or usual for the majority of humans, This isnt even arguable the argument comes from overbearing people that want it the way they want it, with no compromise.

Abnormal behavior in the case of homosexuality is obvious

We can change that and make straight sex abnormal.. :mrgreen:
 
We can change that and make straight sex abnormal.. :mrgreen:

Now I'm scared ... and a bit sad.

Good thing I'm old... but not old enough :stars:
 
Last edited:
We can change that and make straight sex abnormal.. :mrgreen:

Some day it will just be "having sex", without qualifiers like "strait" or "gay" or "acceptable" or "perverse" or "normal" or "abnormal".
 
First off you can't compare the situation to modern society, we have kind of made an artificial environment. This is because society can go away in the blink of a second, its not forever, nuclear holocaust can eliminate it instantly resulting to pre-caveman days.

I simply do not agree, i think it is obvious that homosexuality is some kind of developmental error in the original blueprint of our genes. You never answered my questions on whether having born with a third eye , or with no hair, or with purple eyes, or with schizophrenia, is abnormal. These are just as abnormal as homosexuality is... they are just not what the ideal biological human being is programed to have. It is very clear that every aspect of our body has a specific function that helps us survive and our sexual drive is one of them... and homosexuality is NOT one of them.

Homosexuality is abnormal, but its not immoral or bad. They arn't inferior, just different. In my opinion if we had to send Invading aliens a perfect example of the collective gene pool of a normal human being... they would NOT BE GAY.

I am trying to be respectful. It seems to me that you're arguing that homosexuality is abnormal, because it could hinder our ability to survive and reproduce the population, right?

So it's important for me to ask, do you understand that overpopulation can drive a species to extinction? Putting too much stress on our food and water resources can extinct them, and eventually have consequences for our entire species. Promoting growth and reproduction is not a good thing... Overpopulation can have serve and negative consequences. China for example would kill children because of overpopulation.

We don't want overpopulation, so it seems to me that for evolutionary purposes have some people incapable of reproducing because of infertility or even homosexuality. Everybody not reproducing is beneficial to us. We just can't keep growing as a population, keep paving more roads, cutting down more trees, or keep exhausting all of our natural resources because we would be slowing killing ourselves.

Also, to suggest that we were forced to live in caves and not be able to reproduce suggests that homosexuals don't even care about the species...

1. We don't need clinics to reproduce without sexual intercourse. We need semen and a vagina.
2. The rate of reproduction would depend on the number of women to men.
3. If a group of men were that concerned about reproducing in such a crisis, they could very well resort to rape which is why your attitude is jacked up.

Bottom line is, homosexuals do care about the survival of the human race and reproduction rates are far from being the only thing you should be concerned about.
 
Last edited:
Some day it will just be "having sex", without qualifiers like "strait" or "gay" or "acceptable" or "perverse" or "normal" or "abnormal".

That makes too many assumptions for my brain to handle... right now anyway
 
Back
Top Bottom