Accepting gay marriage is putting Christians in Africa at risk

[BurnItDwn]

Person A kills person B because person B supports person C.

The blame is clearly on Person A.
Person B is not at fault.
Person C is not at fault.

 

[BurnItDwn]

So infanticide is natural? Then why is it illegal for humans?

I once had a rabbit who would eat her kits. Every litter she had she would eat the heads and most of the bodies of her babies. I ended up knocking that rabbit in the head and eating her.

If a human woman were to eat her baby, she would be put in prison.

Religious Right: Homosexuality is NOT NATURAL! IT SHOULD BE BANNED!
Nature: Homosexuality is natural. Here is proof.
Religious Right: Eating babies is natural too! So it also is OK right?
Nature: Nature does not give a fuck and does not matter in this case.

Nature just proved you wrong when you said that that homosexuality was not natural. Since, it very clearly is natural.


Why does the religious right assume that because something is natural, such as infanticide, then it must be a good thing to do?

 

[classy]

Religious Right: Homosexuality is NOT NATURAL! IT SHOULD BE BANNED!
Nature: Homosexuality is natural. Here is proof.
Religious Right: Eating babies is natural too! So it also is OK right?
Nature: Nature does not give a fuck and does not matter in this case.

Nature just proved you wrong when you said that that homosexuality was not natural. Since, it very clearly is natural.


Why does the religious right assume that because something is natural, such as infanticide, then it must be a good thing to do?

?????????????

Florida is full of Burmese Pythons and it is not natural. Speaking on behalf of nature saying homosexuality is natural is quite foolish. If I look at nature which is not driven by reason or bigotry, it is clear homosexuality is not the intention of nature.

 

[dank69]

?????????????

Florida is full of Burmese Pythons and it is not natural. Speaking on behalf of nature saying homosexuality is natural is quite foolish. If I look at nature which is not driven by reason or bigotry, it is clear homosexuality is not the intention of nature.

What about masturbation?

 

[smackababy]

?????????????

Florida is full of Burmese Pythons and it is not natural. Speaking on behalf of nature saying homosexuality is natural is quite foolish. If I look at nature which is not driven by reason or bigotry, it is clear homosexuality is not the intention of nature.

Nature doesn't have intentions. The fact that animals can be homosexual in nature (with no outside stimulus) proves homosexual is naturally occurring.

As far as infanticide, it is widely practiced among the animal kingdom.

 

[classy]

What about masturbation?

Sexual gratification is normal, but it is influenced by the things around us. My point is when you talk about homosexuality, comparing human behavior to that of the animal kingdom is really way off. Animals operate under instinct, they are not program to act out of reason, despite the fact like in the case of dogs they can be trained.

If nature was speaking, I think it goes without saying, that what I see as a majority, over whelming majority, I would have to conclude that is what nature intended. It is not swayed by emotions or responds based on thought input.

As for this argument, as religious people we have to learn to respect the human rights of those who don't think like us. And homosexuals need to stop trying to make people give their approval.

 

[BurnItDwn]

classy, you do not make sense.

happens in nature
is natural

Both mean the same thing.

Mypoint is that the entire "not natural" argument is a logical fallacy and not relevant. It's an argument with no merit, no base, no argument. It's fluff. It's at best a bullshit excuse that people can hide behind.

In any case, it does not hurt me for you to be wrong or have incorrect beliefs. You can believe whatever the hell you want to believe. It's a free country

 

[classy]

Nature doesn't have intentions. The fact that animals can be homosexual in nature (with no outside stimulus) proves homosexual is naturally occurring.

As far as infanticide, it is widely practiced among the animal kingdom.

My argument is not that it naturally occurs, but that doesn't mean it is what nature intended. I don't argue that you are wrong per say, but If something is occurring 98% of the time with no outside influence, it is clear that is the norm and the 2% is not. Let me put this way, if your argument is people should look at nature as guide that being homosexual is normal, the flip side is, obviously looking at the numbers its not normal.

 

[classy]

classy, you do not make sense.

happens in nature
is natural

Both mean the same thing.

Mypoint is that the entire "not natural" argument is a logical fallacy and not relevant. It's an argument with no merit, no base, no argument. It's fluff. It's at best a bullshit excuse that people can hide behind.

In any case, it does not hurt me for you to be wrong or have incorrect beliefs. You can believe whatever the hell you want to believe. It's a free country

Completely wrong, you want to use natural as being normal, two completely different things.

 

[zinfamous]

My argument is not that it naturally occurs, but that doesn't mean it is what nature intended. I don't argue that you are wrong per say, but If something is occurring 98% of the time with no outside influence, it is clear that is the norm and the 2% is not. Let me put this way, if your argument is people should look at nature as guide that being homosexual is normal, the flip side is, obviously looking at the numbers its not normal.

I don't get it. Nature intends nothing. Nature simply happens.

what are you trying to argue?

 

[classy]

classy, you do not make sense.

happens in nature
is natural

Both mean the same thing.

Mypoint is that the entire "not natural" argument is a logical fallacy and not relevant. It's an argument with no merit, no base, no argument. It's fluff. It's at best a bullshit excuse that people can hide behind.

In any case, it does not hurt me for you to be wrong or have incorrect beliefs. You can believe whatever the hell you want to believe. It's a free country

And this is why I have been avoiding these arguments, I have damn near of creation that backs my belief that homosexuality is not normal. What do you have? And let me be clear, I have stated here that under the constitution they should be allowed to marry and be protected like everyone else. And they also should accept the same rejections, lol, that everyone else gets as well.

 

[BurnItDwn]

Completely wrong, you want to use natural as being normal, two completely different things.

My argument is not about normalcy.
My argument is against people who claim or state that they disapprove of gay rights due to it being unnatural. They are not saying abnormal, they specifically say unnatural.


Now, if you are talking about normal, what is normal? Some people like women feet, some like butts, some like tits, some like glasses, some like blonds, some like a little bit of light rope play, some like more "hard" of things. There are a billion different fantasies. If normal exists, it's very narrow in scope and completely irrelevant for anything but the most homogenous of communities.

 

[classy]

I don't get it. Nature intends nothing. Nature simply happens.

what are you trying to argue?

That is completely wrong. That is so far from making sense, I could spend months blowing up that statement.

 

[smackababy]

My argument is not that it naturally occurs, but that doesn't mean it is what nature intended. I don't argue that you are wrong per say, but If something is occurring 98% of the time with no outside influence, it is clear that is the norm and the 2% is not. Let me put this way, if your argument is people should look at nature as guide that being homosexual is normal, the flip side is, obviously looking at the numbers its not normal.

Normal is defined by a society's acceptances, nothing about nature or natural or anything. Whether or not it is "normal" is completely subjective. Let's look at something such as albinism. That is natural, and is far from the norm in terms of mere statistics. Should we pretend that it is a choice? Or that those who exhibit said traits should be denied rights?

 

[classy]

My argument is not about normalcy.
My argument is against people who claim or state that they disapprove of gay rights due to it being unnatural. They are not saying abnormal, they specifically say unnatural.


Now, if you are talking about normal, what is normal? Some people like women feet, some like butts, some like tits, some like glasses, some like blonds, some like a little bit of light rope play, some like more "hard" of things. There are a billion different fantasies. If normal exists, it's very narrow in scope and completely irrelevant for anything but the most homogenous of communities.

I don't disagree with anything here. But as I stated before this argument swings in both directions, especially when you start dragging nature into it.

 

[zinfamous]

That is completely wrong. That is so far from making sense, I could spend months blowing up that statement.

That is actually completely right. Natural selection is a process with no pre-conceived goal. Things happen along a trajectory. Unfavorable traits will and often do survive on in subsequent generations, as well as favorable traits. Nature has no say in what is favorable or unfavorable. Nature is not a sentient being.

This is the law that governs nature. Ergo, Nature intends nothing.

 

[Texashiker]

I don't get it. Nature intends nothing. Nature simply happens.

Last weekend my wife and I had a bunch of friends over to celebrate my wifes birthday. One of the people who attended the party brought his dog. Lets call him dog A.

Another friend who showed up brought her dog. Lets call this one dog B.

Both dogs are male.

Dog A started humping dog B.

One of the things that separates us from animals, we do not go around repeating their behavior.

 

[MrPickins]

That is completely wrong. That is so far from making sense, I could spend months blowing up that statement.

Don't anthropomorphize nature. It hates that.

 

[bshole]

My argument is not that it naturally occurs, but that doesn't mean it is what nature intended.

I disagree that nature INTENDS anything. Nature has no intent whatsoever. Nature is simply what we observe the natural world doing. That is the end of it.

 

[smackababy]

Last weekend my wife and I had a bunch of friends over to celebrate my wifes birthday. One of the people who attended the party brought his dog. Lets call him dog A.

Another friend who showed up brought her dog. Lets call this one dog B.

Both dogs are male.

Dog A started humping dog B.

One of the things that separates us from animals, we do not go around repeating their behavior.

What does this have to do with anything? A dog asserting it's dominance over another? Had both of the dogs been female, you'd be okay with it right?

 

[Texashiker]

What does this have to do with anything?

Do you want me to spell it out for you?

A dog asserting it's dominance over another? Had both of the dogs been female, you'd be okay with it right?

Heck yea.

I would have probably grabbed my camera, videoed the humping and posted it to youtube.

 

[soulcougher73]

I find religion unnatural. I think we should ban it and deny people the right to express themselves religiously.

Is that how this works? Did i do it right?

 

[smackababy]

Do you want me to spell it out for you?

Yes, please do.

 

[JulesMaximus]

It's a risk I'm willing to take.

 

[Texashiker]

Yes, please do.

Monkey see, monkey do.