User Tag List

First 162425262728 Last

Results 251 to 260 of 300

  1. #251
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,643

    Default

    How about smoking or drinking alcohol? That is damn unnatural. So is driving a car, let alone flying.

    Besides, humans aren't the only species with a certain share of homosexual specimen, which should prove it's not cultural.

    Failing that, so far nobody has explained how "natural" or not has anything to do with morally right or wrong.

    As for the OP. Since this thread ended being about the rights or wrongs of homosexuality instead of about marriage and what defines it, I'm afraid there is still a long way to go!
    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  2. #252
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    Besides, humans aren't the only species with a certain share of homosexual specimen, which should prove it's not cultural.
    That's one of the largest things.

    If it were simply a [moral] choice and not a natural/programmed one, it's likely homosexuality would not show up in the zillions of species that it does, whether it's under particularly contextual constaints or not. It's not a rare thing, and in a few species, homosexual behavior is the norm, not the exception -- there's just enough het action to propogate the species. i.e., it's "natural," but people are redefining natural to fit their own concept of natural (such as "sex has to be directly aimed at immediate procreation" rather than perhaps contributing something else "natural" to a species' needs or even just being random but steady variation as there are with so many other biological traits that seemingly serve no purpose).

    This is all stuff one can read about simply by Googling various topics, it's not secret information.


    As for the OP. Since this thread ended being about the rights or wrongs of homosexuality instead of about marriage and what defines it, I'm afraid there is still a long way to go!
    I know. The only reason I really posted it was a "Hmm, that's an interesting shift, I'll just share it," thing... and pretty quickly it just became a horrendous back and forth on the behavior itself. I guess I should have known better.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #253
    That chalkboard guy Matthew_Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    xxxx
    Posts
    1,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwn86 View Post
    The anus also doesn't produce natural lubricant during arousal. I can't even see why this would be a discussion... I know you people are smarter than this.
    If MSM anal sex isn't natural then:
    • Why do animals engage in it?
    • Why can it be so pleasurable for the receptive partner? (see: prostate orgasms)


    Also, not to be a cynic, but Gallup samples have a 95% confidence interval of ±3%. Although the sample had 53% favoring same-sex marriage, the proportion of Americans favoring same-sex marriage could be anywhere from 50% to 56%. (or, if we're using Gallup's more conservative ±4% figure, between 49% and 57%.) While it's very good news to see that the general public is growing less ignorant and more accepting of queer identities, the issue doesn't significantly favor same-sex marriage at this point.
    If a deaf INFP falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

  4. #254

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    How about smoking or drinking alcohol? That is damn unnatural. So is driving a car, let alone flying.

    Besides, humans aren't the only species with a certain share of homosexual specimen, which should prove it's not cultural.

    Failing that, so far nobody has explained how "natural" or not has anything to do with morally right or wrong.

    As for the OP. Since this thread ended being about the rights or wrongs of homosexuality instead of about marriage and what defines it, I'm afraid there is still a long way to go!
    Well, I highlighted the last part because that IS what it is about, that's what its always been about, that's what it will always be about. You could change every single word in the dictionary, rob them all of meaning altogether, change every single social institution that there is and it wont be enough because there could be someone, somewhere, some how, tenaciously clinging on to a single idea which falls short of approving and affirming homosexuals and homosexuality.

    Why is it important to argue whether its natural or not? I think the analogy of drinking alcohol or driving a car is a fair one, the reason why the naturalness of it is important is that it is conceived by many as synomyous with approval and affirmation as to homosexuality in the animal kingdom I would question its significance or pervasiveness to be honest, it is something which is selected much as cognitive bias would cause or compell someone with a great need of particular proofs to select it. What is essentially anomalous, aberrant or abnormal is identified as normative.

    Even if it were pervasive among the animals, so what? Lionesses will eat the young of rivals, do humans do that? Should they? Perhaps it is natural too?

  5. #255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew_Z View Post
    If MSM anal sex isn't natural then:
    • Why do animals engage in it?
    • Why can it be so pleasurable for the receptive partner? (see: prostate orgasms)


    Also, not to be a cynic, but Gallup samples have a 95% confidence interval of ±3%. Although the sample had 53% favoring same-sex marriage, the proportion of Americans favoring same-sex marriage could be anywhere from 50% to 56%. (or, if we're using Gallup's more conservative ±4% figure, between 49% and 57%.) While it's very good news to see that the general public is growing less ignorant and more accepting of queer identities, the issue doesn't significantly favor same-sex marriage at this point.
    What was the percentage of the population which was considered to have grown "less ignorant" enough to empower Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mughabi etc. again?

    To be honest I'd seriously doubt that the pleasure principle is sufficient to determine anal intercourse is natural, I've dealt with the reference to the animal kingdom already, to be honest affirming the pleasure principle in that manner and connecting it with animal norms is pretty telling to me about what direction the campaign for homosexual norms will take humanity if it can.

  6. #256
    Senior Member Sanctus Iacobus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew_Z View Post
    If MSM anal sex isn't natural then:
    • Why do animals engage in it?
    By accident... sexual confusion, if you will.


    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew_Z View Post
    If MSM anal sex isn't natural then:
    • Why can it be so pleasurable for the receptive partner? (see: prostate orgasms)
    The pleasure nerves in the anal cavity are there to stimulate the expulsion of feces, which helps keep it clear of harmful bacteria.

  7. #257
    That chalkboard guy Matthew_Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    xxxx
    Posts
    1,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    What was the percentage of the population which was considered to have grown "less ignorant" enough to empower Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mughabi etc. again?
    Wait, what? I appreciate the recognition of the fact that 20th century dictators have a tendency to purge homosexuals and can see how this supports the notion that free-speech repressive societies are more prone to ideologically banning homosexuality, but I don't think that's the point trying to be made here.


    To be honest I'd seriously doubt that the pleasure principle is sufficient to determine anal intercourse is natural, I've dealt with the reference to the animal kingdom already, to be honest affirming the pleasure principle in that manner and connecting it with animal norms is pretty telling to me about what direction the campaign for homosexual norms will take humanity if it can.
    Why yes, of course the idea that we should copy the primary predators animals of nature and use this to dictate human morality is completely barbaric. With this point I have no disagreement. (although I think the ideal that cannibalism is ALWAYS wrong is certainly absurd, especially in the context of human survival.) What the "pleasure principle" affirms is that homosexual and heterosexual sexual activities are essentially equal, disproving the archaic notion that homosexual activities are "unnatural." In short, the evidence merely suggests that the stigma around homosexual activity is merely a human cultural constructing, leading to the question, "If heterosexual activities can be ethical, why can homosexual activities not be?"



    For jwn86:
    By accident... sexual confusion, if you will.
    That was, at a time, a popularly held hypothesis (reinforced by cultural bias, no less) that would eventually turn out to be disproven by animal behaviorists.

    The pleasure nerves in the anal cavity are there to stimulate the expulsion of feces, which helps keep it clear of harmful bacteria.
    Yes, indeed, it's true that having nerves around the anus is an evolutionary advantage for any species possessing a digestive tract. However, every organ of the human body has more than one function, and that the anus functions exceptionally well for sexual pleasure requires a more holistic explanation. (for instance, why anal sex stimulates the prostate, a fact that serves no function in peristalsis.
    If a deaf INFP falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

  8. #258

    Default

    My point, which I suspect you realise, is that the majority have supported monsterous creeds, with the consequence of monsterous deeds before, a majority getting behind ruining the institution of marriage and believing it will have no consequence would just be the latest. Although I suspect that the reason the majority would support such a thing would be that they're worn down, apathetic, ignorant or simply dont care.

    When it turns out that this doesnt placate advocates of homosexuality anymore than any previous change which has benefited them and their target audience and they get bolder in their agitation even then maybe people will start to give a shit.

  9. #259
    That chalkboard guy Matthew_Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    xxxx
    Posts
    1,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    My point, which I suspect you realise, is that the majority have supported monsterous creeds, with the consequence of monsterous deeds before, a majority getting behind ruining the institution of marriage and believing it will have no consequence would just be the latest. Although I suspect that the reason the majority would support such a thing would be that they're worn down, apathetic, ignorant or simply dont care.

    When it turns out that this doesnt placate advocates of homosexuality anymore than any previous change which has benefited them and their target audience and they get bolder in their agitation even then maybe people will start to give a shit.
    A few objections, which I hope to see addressed:
    1. How is legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States directly analogous to resolutions passed by a supposed "majority" in 2nd and 3rd world nations? Are actions passed a majority in a democratic society truly no different than actions passed under totalitarian regimes?
    2. In what way does legalization of same-sex marriage "ruin the institution of marriage"? What are the "consequences" of such an action as alluded to in the post quoted?
    3. What evidence suggests that the primary reason a majority would support same-sex marriage is either ignorance or apathy?


    Without these points addressed, I fail to see the validity of the conclusion in the post I've quoted.
    If a deaf INFP falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

  10. #260
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    My point, which I suspect you realise, is that the majority have supported monsterous creeds, with the consequence of monsterous deeds before, a majority getting behind ruining the institution of marriage and believing it will have no consequence would just be the latest. Although I suspect that the reason the majority would support such a thing would be that they're worn down, apathetic, ignorant or simply dont care.

    When it turns out that this doesnt placate advocates of homosexuality anymore than any previous change which has benefited them and their target audience and they get bolder in their agitation even then maybe people will start to give a shit.
    Why are you so afraid of homosexual people? Did you have a bad uncle when you were young?

Similar Threads

  1. Same-sex Marriage, do you support it?
    By Julius_Van_Der_Beak in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 608
    Last Post: 08-27-2015, 02:49 PM
  2. Obama Administration Support for Same-Sex Marriage
    By Totenkindly in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 03-09-2013, 09:23 PM
  3. Question for those who oppose same-sex marriage on religious grounds:
    By Brendan in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 111
    Last Post: 05-05-2010, 09:32 PM
  4. Do you think same-sex marriage should be legal?
    By ez78705 in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 257
    Last Post: 05-22-2009, 05:02 PM
  5. Christianity Today Poll (same-sex marriages)
    By Totenkindly in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 09-14-2007, 08:53 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO