Search results

I wasn't suggesting that it does. In that case replace mistake with a similar word that would appropriately describe what I have referred to as a"mistake" in evolution. Yes it is unnatural.

I didn't start with the unnatural. I just used it because someone else did. Unnatural is a fairly ambiguous word. If you want to take it as just meaning abnormal then homosexuals are definitely unnatural.

...but not none. That doesn't mean the same idea automatically applies. Of course it is harmful. Homosexuality = Less Offspring = Disadvantage in terms of survival of the species. I don't think it has been beneficial recently enough, and I understand how far I am going back a fair way...

I don't think it is fair to compare humans to other social animals in this way and I don't know enough about how homosexuality progresses through generations to respond to that second point. Since when was it biologically beneficial in humans?

Yes, being a man in a world without women would be. I said design, not designed. There is something stop a homosexual from procreating with another homosexual.

I know that sex is not exclusively for procreation. I also know that other animals engage in homosexual acts. Those things do not change anything. ...but I look at it this way. If everyone was homosexual there would be no procreation and we would no longer exist. Animals are designed to...

Yes and No. I don't really expect them to live in denial. I would find it acceptable for them to have gay relationships in secret as long as I didn't have to know about it. I certainly wouldn't encourage them to get married to a normal person because as you say its not fair on the partner. In...

No. Those people are acceptable. They do, however, choose to have sex with other gay people... no one is forcing them to do that. They are exactly like straight couples, except they are not straight couples. Marriage is not a basic human right. I'm not an evolutionary scientists, but...

I am a guy... obviously attractive lesbians do not disgust me. Although I still do not support them being able to get married, have kids, or otherwise be free from discrimination and ridicule.

Gay people do affect me. I have to see them... it is disgusting. I have to hear about them.... that is annoying and disgusting... hence I am concerned. If they were to all move somewhere that I wouldn't have to see or hear about them they would no longer affect me and I wouldn't be concerned...

I hate overly fashionable, slightly toned down runway model, fashion just for the sake of fashion type stuff... it almost always makes girls look less attractive. Simply stuff is always better.

Player should be picked on form and nothing else. Slater has been the best fullback this year so he should get the spot. We are going to win easily no matter what... so forget about incumbency and combinations and all that rubbish and just reward the players who have played the best this year.

Why not? People don't dress up to go to uni so why would it be necessary to dress up to go to an early entry interview.

To be honest I don't think it makes any difference at all what you wear.

No it's not.

It's not. I think the study is actually about tolerance and they have called it racism in the article to get attention.

There are a lot of perfectly acceptable reasons for being intolerant.

I have this: http://rushfaster.com.au/product.php?pProductID=VYP-BLK-M2 It's really good. Rushfaster is expensive but their stuff is good quality... at least what I have bought from them has been.

It's got to do with the angle of the runway. They are: 16R/34L Main North-South runway 16L/34R Parallel North-South runway. 07/25 East-West runway.

I voted yes.