Homosexuality in Australia (2 Viewers)

[skip89]

I think homosexuality reduces humanity to animals in that it denies the human will's ability to overide instinctive behaviours which govern animals.
Also, philosphically a living organism is able to nourish itself, grow and to reproduce. The first two are for the survival of the individual. The last is for the survival of the species. If an organism is unable to reproduce, than philosphically it lower in the hiearchy of being. Am i saying mules and liger which do not have the capacity to reproduce are lower on the hiearchy of being? Yes.

 

[dagwoman]

Homosexuality is an instinctive behaviour, just as heterosexuality is. Why should one feel the need to "overcome" their sexuality? That implies that there is something wrong with being gay. Gay people are still physically able to reproduce, and do so, so that's not a reason that being gay is bad. Infertile people are unable to reproduce, and many fertile individuals choose not to have children. Would you say that is "wrong"?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I think homosexuality reduces humanity to animals in that it denies the human will's ability to overide instinctive behaviours which govern animals.

....What?

First of all, humans are animals.
Secondly, by what you've said wouldn't that make sex/eating/sleeping repugnant as we're not over-riding our 'instinctive behaviours'.

Also, philosphically a living organism is able to nourish itself, grow and to reproduce.

Homosexuals are capable of reproducing, many of them also do, you only need to have sex with someone of the opposite sex ONCE in your life out of the (hopefully ) thousands of times you'll do it in order to create a baby.

If an organism is unable to reproduce, than philosphically it lower in the hiearchy of being.

This 'hierarchy' is just something you've made up in order to insult homosexuals... it has no basis other than you arbitrarily deciding what it is that makes a creature 'lower' than another, in this case being its ability to reproduce - something that I would argue is a pathetic measure of a creatures worth. So people can't have kids, homosexuals that choose not to have a kid, other people that choose not to have children are lower forms of life than bacteria. Please re-assess what you're trying to say and come back to us.

 

[dagwoman]

Thank you NTB, you said that MUCH better than I did.

 

[_dhj_]

I think homosexuality reduces humanity to animals in that it denies the human will's ability to overide instinctive behaviours which govern animals.

Are you saying:

- that all humans are instinctively homosexual although most are able to overide those instincts?

- that homosexuals are instinctively homosexual and hetereosexuals are instinctively heterosexual, but since homosexual behaviour is unacceptable it is incumbent on homosexuals to "override" their natural instincts, inspite of the fact that the instincts manifested through no fault of their own?

 

[KFunk]

Also, philosphically a living organism is able to nourish itself, grow and to reproduce. The first two are for the survival of the individual. The last is for the survival of the species. If an organism is unable to reproduce, than philosphically it lower in the hiearchy of being. Am i saying mules and liger which do not have the capacity to reproduce are lower on the hiearchy of being? Yes.

Why is the creature that can (/chooses to) reproduce higher on your chain of being? Also, what has the factual nature of physiological processes, in itself, got to do with philosophy?

 

[skip89]

Firstly, i doubt you have studied philosophy(NTB), because if you have you would no what the hiearchy of being is and too suggest i made it up makes me laugh, mostly at you.
Secondly im the first to admit im not a philosopher, so i can only go off what i no and been taught.
Thirdly despite your passionate attempts to enlighten me, i still believe that humans are not animals like dogs or cats. Now the next is a bit more philospophy im sure youll accuse me of making up so i wont bother.
Also, im am not saying homosexuals ARE lower on the hiearchy of being. Clearly they still have the capacity to reproduce. But the abnormality as dagwoman willingly refers to it, causes them not to fulfill this capacity. I know some people are infertile and some choose not to have kids.
I think of it like this- if everybody was a homosexual, than humankind would cease to continue. Doesnt that say something about homosexuality?

 

[dagwoman]

Humans ARE animals like dogs and cats. We are more evolved and intellectually, mentally and emotionally capable, but still animals. Deal with it. You didn't address many of the points brought up. And when did I willingly call homosexuality an "abnormality"?

If everyone chose not to have children, humankind would cease to continue. So what? Not everyone chooses not to have children. And furthermore, gay people do have children. We've already discussed this.

 

[_dhj_]

I think of it like this- if everybody was a homosexual, than humankind would cease to continue. Doesnt that say something about homosexuality?

If everybody were women, then humanity would cease to continue. Does that say something about women?

The fact is that not everybody are women.

 

[skip89]

And ive already said i do believe that humans are in fact higher than animals. And ive told you thats where the base of each of our arguments lie so we wont agreee on anything. Cant you see that this implies my belief in a higher creation. I think dhj's response is a little empty.
And gay couples do not reproduce by their own merit so i got no idea wat ur trying to say there.
You are right if people chose not to have children they very easily could do this and still have sexual relations.
But in a world where there is no contraception, universal homosexuality would not suit the survival of the species. The species would die out.
And yeah even without contraception people could still choose to not have children. I accept that argument.
And also with your evolutionary argument, how come given the same amount of time no other animal has evelved to the extent we have.

 

[dagwoman]

Your argument about homosexuals not reproducing is pointless. As for the (irrelevant) comment about evolution, do a few more months of biology and you will understand. And as for you saying you believe in a higher being, one could argue that if a higher being thought being gay was bad, there wouldn't be gay people.

 

[skip89]

There isnt much evolution in the HSC course is there. I came first in bio in the prelim HSC. How did u go?
You haven't heard of a thing called free will, not everyhing we are capable of doin we should be doin. Difficult concept for an athiest to understand. I dont see the point of debating ith an athiest as you dont think of higher power in the right way. It not some old dude in a chair shooting lightning.
Biology- survival of the fittest. Most favourable charateristics are passed on for the good o the species yeah? I dont count homosexuality as an adaptation designed for survival. It survived due to the ability of humankind to dominate the planet and ensure its security, reducing the need to costantly adapt to ensure survival of the species.
(If ur not an athiest i apologize for calling you one.

 

[Se!zuRe.]

Alrighty u have both completely lost me on ur thoughts of homosexuality and as i can see are both talking BS based on personal opinions.... plz get some facts to base ur data on and make it clear the points you are both trying to get across and stick on topic.. xD

 

[Se!zuRe.]

Also homosexuals dont natrually reproduce as they usually just have test tube babies.... and seeing i dont see dogs spoodging into test tubes and creating babies i hardly see how gay animals could reproduce..

 

[crazyhomo]

Alrighty u have both completely lost me on ur thoughts of homosexuality and as i can see are both talking BS based on personal opinions.... plz get some facts to base ur data on and make it clear the points you are both trying to get across and stick on topic.. xD

this is quite true.

dagwoman - you're gay, right? you are taking anything said against homosexuality as a personal attack on yourself, so you're replies are emotional and not at all convincing

skip89 - you've just decided that 'humans are higher beings', which has no basis in reality. once you get rid of your faulty premise, the rest of your arguments fall apart. for example "how come given the same amount of time no other animal has evelved to the extent we have" assumes that humans are nature's goal, which there is absolutely no evidence for. how come we haven't evolved into elephants given the same amount of time? aren't they bigger? also, having actually studied philosophy at a 2nd year university level, i've not once heard of the phrase 'hierarchy of being'. if you had studied philosophy you would have learnt at it's most basic, philosophy is all about logic, which you have not applied to any of your ideas.

one more thing - please learn to spell. your posts are painful to decipher

 

[skip89]

Thats a win for myself, se!zure jhopkins and all humankind

 

[Se!zuRe.]

Thats a win for myself, se!zure jhopkins and all humankind

sorry to say with comments made by jhopkins i cant see a win in that at all.. although i do congratulate myself and skippy wd.. xD

 

[skip89]

this is quite true.

dagwoman - you're gay, right? you are taking anything said against homosexuality as a personal attack on yourself, so you're replies are emotional and not at all convincing

skip89 - you've just decided that 'humans are higher beings', which has no basis in reality. once you get rid of your faulty premise, the rest of your arguments fall apart. for example "how come given the same amount of time no other animal has evelved to the extent we have" assumes that humans are nature's goal, which there is absolutely no evidence for. how come we haven't evolved into elephants given the same amount of time? aren't they bigger? also, having actually studied philosophy at a 2nd year university level, i've not once heard of the phrase 'hierarchy of being'. if you had studied philosophy you would have learnt at it's most basic, philosophy is all about logic, which you have not applied to any of your ideas.

one more thing - please learn to spell. your posts are painful to decipher

firstly, ive have said that my belief that humans are higher is the base of my argument previously in this thread. Next, i concede my bias towards metaphysicality since i was also learning theoloy at the time.
We did not eveolve into elephants becaue it did not favour our survival. Did you study 2nd year biology?
And to agentprovocater, i dont belive all humans will become homosexuls. Look bak in the thread and youll see wat i was getting at.

 

[Se!zuRe.]

this is quite true.

dagwoman - you're gay, right? you are taking anything said against homosexuality as a personal attack on yourself, so you're replies are emotional and not at all convincing

skip89 - you've just decided that 'humans are higher beings', which has no basis in reality. once you get rid of your faulty premise, the rest of your arguments fall apart. for example "how come given the same amount of time no other animal has evelved to the extent we have" assumes that humans are nature's goal, which there is absolutely no evidence for. how come we haven't evolved into elephants given the same amount of time? aren't they bigger? also, having actually studied philosophy at a 2nd year university level, i've not once heard of the phrase 'hierarchy of being'. if you had studied philosophy you would have learnt at it's most basic, philosophy is all about logic, which you have not applied to any of your ideas.

one more thing - please learn to spell. your posts are painful to decipher

ty its always good to be told ur right.. xD <3

 

[Se!zuRe.]

firstly, ive have said that my belief that humans are higher is the base of my argument previously in this thread. Next, i concede my bias towards metaphysicality since i was also learning theoloy at the time.
We did not eveolve into elephants becaue it did not favour ur survival. Did you study 2nd year biology?
And to agentprovocater, i dont belive all humans will become homosexuls. Look bak in the thread and youll see wat i was getting at.

well put.... <3.. xD