Straight vs LGBT(Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Transexual)

#241

So this is still about that one line I posted earlier that was misinterpreted by you as “only gays act like this”. This is a thread about gays, I said I don’t have a problem with gays unless they are screaming attentionwhores like -those guys in the picture-. Did I say that -ONLY- gays act like that? I believe I did not.

Well, let me restate that, anyway. Nobody likes douchebags, whether they’re straight or gay. Though this was a thread about gays, so I directed my first statement at gays. Sorry for trying to make a post related to the topic. Next time I’ll try to make my first post in a thread as off-topic as possible.

Edit: Hell, Ieven in that very first post I said that those gays are as retarded as non-gays being retarded. I really don’t get where you get this “he says only gays do that” thing from.

#242

So, make a topic about douchebaggery and how it’s bad (actually, don’t)[/SIZE]. I’m not sure why you’re even bring it up in a topic about homosexuality versus heterosexuality. It was off-topic to begin with.

So, let’s leave it there, shall we? Let’s have your posts be on-topic from now on. :slight_smile:

#243

Unfortunately, I can’t find any other way to put it than that. If it is nature’s intention for something to be, anything that deviates from that aspect could be considered a defect. We all have one (read: we’re not perfect). For some, it’s mood swings, for others it’s sadism, while others still are afflicted by physical abnormalities such as tumors, poor eyesight, or nerve degeneration.

It is no secret that nature intends for there to be heterosexual relationships. Therefore, it is in a way a defect. However, as human beings, we have the capacity to look past this and accept others for their character, and it is this capacity that moronic people fail to utilize.

#244

To me, it’s not really a defect any more than being lefthanded. But, these characteristics could be considered a defect…I guess…in the strictest definition of the word. But, if we’re going to go that far, we could go on to say that marriage and monogamous relationships are not “natural” because nature intends (though the concept that nature intends anything is a very silly to me) for there to be as procreative as possible and monogamy cuts down on that possibility and denies nature (hence “unnatural”). Nature also does not intend for us to live in the frozen tundra, but there are people that live there and are, therefore “defective”…in this really strange definition of the word.

The arguments and rhetoric have gotten extremely stupid, if you ask me (and I know you didn’t). Homosexuality is a characteristic, plain and simple. It’s not a choice…like religion (a choice, I might add, which is steadfastly and strenuously protected at least in the United States and its laws).

#245

I’m not saying that homosexuality is a choice. I’m not saying that homosexuality is neccesarily wrong. But if homosexuality was natural, everyone would have a penis and a vagina.

#246

Jesus H. Christ.

Homosexuality.
Is.
Natural.

I think it’s something like 2/5 of male mallards pair with another male. The majority of mountings that occur among giraffes are homosexual. There’s a species of dolphin that pleasures either sex. Et-fucking-cetera.

#247

It’s not a defect any more than white skin is a defect or being a homo sapiens rather than homo erectus is a defect. (hurr hurr penis joke)

#248

So you just want everyone to be as unspecial as you.

Okay. Good luck with that.

(writes a Rush Limbaugh-Tyrannosaurus slashfic)

#249

This is why I tried so hard not to use the word “defect.” But after a full minute, I could not think of anything better. >.<

FYI, from a biological standpoint, I believe that we as a species evolved to have two separate sexes and one sexual preference. Bringing dolphins, giraffes, and monkeys into this conversation doesn’t really make sense since they aren’t what we are discussing.

Natural selection would not create terms in which off-spring would not be created. This leads us to one of two options: either it is a choice (which it is most certainly not) or it is a hormonal and mental state which deviates from what nature intends. I know it might be prettier to say that homosexuality is natural (which technically it is, we certainly didn’t create it in a lab or something). But science, and the theory of evolution, points to a genetic, hormonal, or mental anomaly.

And, regardless of how this makes me sound, I am still in full support of of gay rights and equality. They are still people. They have such a small “defect” it doesn’t even matter what that defect is.

Just so you know, I call anything I believe that deviates from what might be intended for the species to be a defect. That includes high cholesterol, being bi-polar, being ambidextrous, having club-foot, and being double-jointed. These are all so minor they have nothing to do with the actual person, much like homosexuality. But they are all still defects.

We all have defects. None of us are perfect.

And this is all coming out wrong, so I’mma step out.

As for your animal homosexuality standpoint, yes this may be true. But they all still ultimately mate with a female sooner or later. And maybe I can’t see it cause I’m not a specialist in any of these animals, or perhaps it’s because I’m not an animal myself, but I don’t believe dolphins and giraffes are the most sexually dimorphic creatures out there. Then again, I’m probably off base on this since, as I stated, I’m not a specialist in the field of specific animals.

#250

Try evolutionary trait. That makes more sense than ‘defect’, which implies a mistake.

Natural selection WOULD allow something like that to happen if it were to help the growth of the population. A homosexual creature that doesn’t pair-bond with another can work within its species to raise their young, increasing the chance of the familial group’s genes being passed on. Within a tribe a homosexual couple wouldn’t have children, allowing them to focus less on baby-sitting and more on hunting/skinning/cooking/etc.

Another instance I read, but don’t remember word for word, involves homosexuality being a sort of tool that allows males beneath the alpha male to spread their genes. The idea is that the alpha male would see lesbian females and confuse them for males, or attempt to mate with homosexual males and produce no offspring, decreasing the number of females he can impregnate, allowing less-strong, or beta-males a chance to couple.

#251

That’s the thing. It isn’t evolutionary. It could have been evolutionary if homosexuals had sex with females and could pass their genes on once in a while. But since that usually doesn’t happen, unless he becomes a sperm donor or she becomes an egg donor, it isn’t evolutionary.

Bisexuality, then, is a different case. Not a defect, because sex with the other gender is still participated in.

#252

I think Winged is on the ball with this one and I completely agree with him on everything.

#253

The problem with both Winged One’s (and now NavMan’s) assumption is that nature “intends” for us to procreate and NOTHING MORE.

This is demonstrably false and nonsensical. Nature is far more than simple procreation. While homosexuals cannot procreate, that doesn’t mean they’re noncontributing members of nature. Far from it.

The reason dolphins, dogs, giraffes, penguins and so on are often brought up is to show that, homosexuality is a product of evolution. Homosexuals (of any “higher” animal) provide protection and help to offspring where the parent creatures are unwilling or unable to care for them. Homosexual penguins, for example, while they cannot produce offspring of their own, will take in and care for an egg that does not belong to them if the parents die.

Bringing it back to human beings, gay people can take in foster children and adopt them as their own. I’m quite sure that there are people that read that sentence I just typed and throw themselves into a tizzy (“zOMFG! You can’t have gay people adopting and raising kids! It’s unnatural!”) when it is actually these selfsame people that are trying to STOP the natural course of homosexuals…which, in turn, hurts the species as a whole.

#254

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jrh8VVwMI4

That video seems to clear up the “unnatural” argument pretty well. In short, homosexuality IS natural or it wouldn’t occur in nature anyways, and the fact of the matter is that so many things we do are, by the definition people use to describe homosexuality, “unnatural” (see buildings, clothes) that in order to call homosexuality bad by saying it is unnatural would be hypocritical. You’d have to call everything that separates humans from nature to be bad as well, and then you’d be dying naked in a forest somewhere.

#255

Ask a fancier (person who keeps pigeons) how female pigeons act when there’s no male partner around.

The answer is: they try to have sex with eachother and act like a perfectly normal male-female pigeon couple in all the thing they do.

Homosexuality is a perfectly natural thing and is related to the urge of social contact.

#256

Out of my 3 roommates.

1 is gay
the other conservative christian.

Both are in relationships, obviously the gay roommate has a boyfriend and christian guy has a girlfriend.

Both relationships involve regular sex.

While, I am not creeped out by either, nor should I based of my own relationships with male and female partners, the bible thumping girlfriend feels the need to gay bash every chance she gets. Once after the christian couple were done bumping uglies she walks out of the her boyfriends room at 2 am and feels the need to say something along the lines of “Sex as god intended” as loud as she can while the gay couple are still doing their thing.

I’m not sure if they heard her, or really care. But what appalls me is she has the gall to even say it.

Based off my own experience, I didn’t choose to become attracted to some males, I just happen to be, while it’s a rare case and I prefer women, I wont let that get in my way of finding happiness. I was raised Mormon, now Atheist, and my family is pretty conservative, so I stay in the closet.

It’s a natural and beautiful thing.

#257

Not cool.

That’s more like it.

Bad.

You started off badly there, finally realized the point I was going to make in this point, then fell right back down, as if you had never made the other post. You also made the point in defense of the straight public BDSM photo along the lines of “They’re probably normal business people or something in everyday life.” Why can’t that be possible for the gay-mardi-gras-ers?

#258

Oh, so they are married? :wink:

#259

Bitch just got CALLED OUT! From an unspecified amount of time in the future.

#260

We’ve already been over this. I hate douchebags in general.

A gay guy throwing it all in my face that he likes to shove his penis up the shitter of another guy, is as much of a douchebag as a straight guy throwing it in my face how hard he banged a chick the other day, and in his turn is as much of a douchebag as a guy dressing up like a retard during carnaval and annoying people he doesn’t know.

Let’s move on now.

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.