but they serve no biological functions, they are anomalies, like people having tails, or traces of it

yeah, by accident. Or sure if it feels good.



No, not at all. You don't have to have children every time you have sex. I'm saying all sex- is Heterosexual sex in nature.
Homosexuality is a human's perspective of twisting the variations of heterosexuality. It's another by product- as is people who have sex with.. sofas.. vacuum cleaners. animals or whatever...

They serve no biological function? No reproductive function, but so what? That only makes sense if your main criteria for sex is only reproduction.

MOST communal and intelligent animals have higher instances of homosexuality than less communal and less intelligent animals. Can you explain this if there is truely no function for homosexuality? why has something with "no biological function" persisted since the beginning of our species? Interesting that this "anamoly" repeats itself over and over, where one would imagine that gays not breeding would wipe it out.

ok, in light of theory of evolution, is there any room to consider that sex evolved for other reasons that reproduction?

are you saying that orgasm is not a trick mechanism to get animals to reproduce?

Sure, maybe it's genetic disorder in some cases.. or a psychological disorder- like obsessive compulsive disorder or just by 'choice'.
Probably a different reason for each case or individual (if you like.)

I'm certainly glad to hear that, lad

Just a quick note to remind people that this is the Spirituality, Religion and Beliefs board. Homosexuality is always a touchy subject (no puns) on these boards, and almost always inevitably leads to flaming, flame-baiting and the eventual closure of the thread. So far, this topic has been discussed civilly and without attacking/debating opinions. However, I've seen indications in the last page or two that the thread is about to spiral into attacks and counter-attacks.

Try and keep things civil, and hopefully this thread can remain open for a little while longer yet

~ Regards, PA

so that would include barren women and men with non existant sperm counts too ? they serve no biologlical function.

sex is only a small part of who we are. If you could never have sex again in your life would you still be a straight man ?

it makes alot of sense. we don't live through our sexual organs. it's more than about sex. it's who you are. it's love , attraction , happiness , affection , non sexual intimacy,joy , companionship. ect........... everything that makes a good spouse.

maybe if you had those things in your life you'd understand that. if you had them you would never have stated what you did because you yourself would know who we are doesn't revolve around our genitals. it may for you. but that's sad.

this has to be the dumbest post from you I've read . are you serious ? lol

I guess all those straight couples practicing *spam filter* and oral are emulating gay men ? as for lesbians , although some use toys ( as do straight people ) , the main part of pleasure doesn't need anything more than a grin. ( something alot of straight men loathe or do badly I hear)


off shoot ? how about this - want to really know how to make love to your wife ? ask a lesbian. vice versa for the wives. so the old saying goes. it isn't an offshoot. at the very least it's equal and in some ways better. We don't find children accidents and become dead beats leaving single family homes. when we want kids we have to plan for them. no surprises.

as for artificial ---- Vi*gra sure is artificial and plenty of straight men use it. ( although some like Rush limpbaugh get it 'covertly' .)

your in over your head billy on a subject you know nothing about except for ignorant attitudes and sterotypes. It would be fine if you knew what you were speaking about , but you keep making a fool of yourself. it's sad. kinda like Bill O'Rielly.

So, Lt Ripley you're comparing homosexuality to defective heterosexuals. You may well have a point.
This is interesting.
Sure, a blind person is equal to someone who can see, yet the unfortunately the blind person still has a defective optic nerve.

Ripley, let's keep it a civilised discussion.
Sex is the very definition of homosexuals-
Otherwise you could class me as an 'asexual homosexual.' ie I know men who I love.
But I prefer to call them friends.

Sure , and plenty of cases of "rape," "infanticide" and other acts designed to establish sexual supremacy. Their prime purpose is usually propogation of the individual male genes at any cost. This, I guess, does make them normal acts in the animal kingdom, but are you suggesting that makes them normal or acceptable in human society.

Forget religion. Nature's rules are designed for the propogation of the species and the selection of the genes best fitted for survival. The genetic trait which determines homosexuality does not fit within either of these criteria. Take the argument to an extreme. If homosexual orientation was the predominate genetic trait, how long would humanity survive?

Certainly, humanity can afford to have a small percentage of non heterosexual and even non sexual members, but in our modern and seemingly very robust popuations we tend to forget that this has not always been so. Given present conditions, we can sustain a certain level of homosexuality or non reproductive sex, but historically this has simply not always been the case, nor is it assured to be the case under future conditions, such as a time of rapidly declining population numbers.

Logically, a genetic predisposition to homosexuality should be seen as a genetic flaw ( i cant see any way to avoid language which may be seen as judgemental) in the same way as a predisposition to infertility, cancer or a number of genetic diseases.
I know this can feel offensive to present day homosexual people, and while it is probably no consolation, i see them as having precisely the same human value as any other variant of humanity.

I won't carry this argument any further except to say that my wife and i were unable to have children for an undetermined reason, or reasons. Our life has been fulfilled and happy despite this, but if I had a choice I would want medical science to be able to "fix" the flaw or flaws which prevented us from having children.

Because as "normal" human beings we should have a choice in the matter, not have it determined by genetic chance. Being barren or sterile or for some other reason not able to reproduce, is not a normal, or natural, state of affairs.

Homosexuality is all of the above, yes. Loving that same sex and being in-love and lust are but a part of the equation. Any relationship is quite complex as it is, be it gay, straight, trans-x, ménage, poly-game, etc -- oh, let's not forget leather, don't want anybody to feel left out. Some could also argue that it's the NATURAL way of nature to control over population, more organic than war. Unfortunately, ne'er-do-well clinicians have farted their way to designate this homo element as a dysfunction, disease, anomaly, psychological disorder, and what have you -- perhaps due to the clinicians' bourgeois upbringing, sexual hang-ups, revenge because of a bad homo sexual-encounter, fill in the blanks. And yes, these also go for those so-called holy men from our (archaic) past, those GUILTY ones.

"Harriet Hypocrite, that's who you are." -- Emory (THE BOYS IN THE BAND)

It seems to me that gays and lesbians have no problem, on that score. Surely, you've seen them get it on, it's all over the internet, as if.

Not really.. I'd die for my friends..(breaths in) wouldn't want to have sex with them though..

A very elegantly written post Mr walker.



I totally agree from a logical perspective. I understand why some people would feel offended but that's hardly the fault of science. If people want to be offended, they might as well be offended at the moon in the night sky.

eww, eww, eww

Bottom line... the Bible says it's wrong. If you don't accept that, whatever. Why try to convince people who believe in what the Bible says that the Bible doesn't say it's wrong? Also, why try to convince a person who believes it's wrong, that it isn't wrong? Silly thing. Instead, why not live and let live?

It is so overdone to bring up the sins of the past... let he who is without sin cast the first stone. I'm not gay, I am married, I am a christian, BUT I have kissed a girl, and done some other... um... stuff... with girls and I although these things were my past, they aren't my present. I am forgiven by God if not by man, and I have no business telling anyone else that they are evil for doing something wrong. The Bible says a thing is wrong - it is wrong. The Bible says a things forgiven through Christ - it's forgiven. Simple as that. We could talk on all sides for days about gay people and activities and it won't change the Bible or God. For me, if I know a thing is wrong, and I do it, I feel compelled to repent. In God's mercy, He always forgives.

Highly debatable.
Maybe the pleasure spot is to help you go to the toilet.. a motivation- in the same way, it's pleasurable to 'eat'
I don't think the anus although it can be was intended as a pseudo-vagina.



Now, who's being prejudiced and stereotyping? Terrible
Sometimes I wonder if some women aren't lesbian, merely because they're reacting to bad experiences with men.
The gay movement certainly is 'reactionary' as are some of its members. It's like they've run out of people left to shock..

I agree with you: It won't change the "popular" interpretation of the Bible. And as far as God, I have never met God to know what's really on God's mind..., to second-guess God. Just my belief system. And yes, certain girls that fall into my type list are the bomb!

People do say that it only takes one right boi to turn you inside, out.

"Free your mind." -- Rupaul

Just for clarities sake...
You're talking about a prostate, and it's just easier to reach it via the anus, vice through the testes and penis. This organs purpose is to create the fluid that carries the sperm. It's not a "G" spot, but stimulation of this organ DURING orgasm is known to increase the intensity of the orgasm.

For those men that have had prostate issues, and had a proctologist "milk" the prostate (extract seminal fluid without an orgasm), you know that this is not a G spot. (I actually yelled at the proctologist and had a nurse run in the office. She thought I had "lost it" and was going to kick the doc's butt. In her defense, I did knock over a chair. ).

Let's not forget: Everything we do here on Earth is based on our reaction to pleasure or pain, even meditation -- a reaction to a particular stimulus. There is nothing shocking about the gay world (nor its many factions) to begin with, but unfortunately, many people are still in their bourgeois mode. The fact of the matter is: I've met quite a number of boring queers. Yeah-yeah, we all know about the "straight" world... Everyone dishes one another, it's an age old dilemma. One's sexual technique is better than the next. One's babe is sexier than the rest. One's penis size is bigger than so and so's. And so on. But thankfully, I don't fall into that trap (ki-ki-ki).

Perhaps Lt_Ripley is talking about the sphincter because "us guys" know all about this, don't we??? Only a liar (or one that's totally out of it) wouldn't cop to the pleasure it brings.

It's not pseudo-vagina. It's called "Man Hole," for us furry-faced he-men.

I'm grossed out. Enough of the mechanics for me. Lets get back to hating God, it's more palatable.

Lol!

I'm pretty sure the only reason this hasn't been shut down yet, is because the mods are betting on who pukes first.
Five bucks on Magic!

^Not quite, but I'm getting close to hovering my finger over that dreaded "closed" button. If this thread keeps going the way it has, it most definitely will be, though.....

It's not closed because most of the posts are quite sincere, even if they have an element of uneasiness, and yes, that titillation factor in the mix. Nothing in this thread warrants it to be closed, nothing, unless one is really that easily offended by bodily functions. It may not be to one's style and taste, but at least, this is one of the most overt thread I've read in years, on the net -- period, without it being crass. It's brutally honest, yes, and that's the way I like it, at times. It's what the internet's for. Life is never one-sided, as you know. And we are in the 21st century, not the phony 20th century.

"...delicious, delicious, oh, how boring???" -- LIQUID SKY (the movie)

lol you're funny dlv... in a good way.

You think I'm funny ("in a good way"), here's a sad joke on all of us:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style...heaidsvirus.htm

Peace to you, billyhill.

"Keep your thoughts pure"- the childrens adventure bible's explanation for adultery in the ten commandments... having sex with children isnt exactly pure.

But, as for homosexuality, live a good life, dont kill, steal, or hurt anyone. And a good idea is to adopt a child. I dont remember homosexuality in the ten commandments.

This kind of belief is unfair........... being homosexual is not a choice .............. and the bible that pinpoints the homos as sinful is I think inhumane..... and it adds to my (suspicions?) ...... the bible really contradicts to some other things that has proven.............( yes well scientifically)........ but is it the truth?......

i suggests that we should try to assess our beliefs.... maybe we are who doesn't follow and accept the works of nature...and not the God Which the bible was trying to imply......

there is no place in the Bible that says homosexuality is sin. It says man having sex with man is sin.
And that IS a choice

So its fine if someone is gay they just can't act on it? Okay every straight person who has sex not for procreation stop what you're doing ITS A SIN! Good luck with that. Look even if homosexuality wasn't even mentioned in the bible, christians and other religions would find a way to not like it. Look at abortion, nothing in the bible but that you owe a woman a few bucks if you accidentally end her pregnancy, conversly christianity has taken that and you have the pro-life movement. If some christians don't like something they'll find a way for god to "say" he doesn't like it either so they can hate you for it.

Everyone has a right to an opinion, and every opinion is influenced by something.

And as for abortion, you don't have to be religious, you just have to have a little heart to feel bad about it

Need to read:

BBC

skeptictank.org

newscientist.com

please reread my post

I said sex is a choice, the act of sex, while homosexuality is not

But the disposition for homosexuality may very well not be.

Besides.....per Christian belief.....God made everything

for the third time that's what I said

pfffttt.... really i think it doesn't if the old testiment says its wrong if you want to go by the bible think of the whole thing. Jesus said he died for our sins period as in they were ALL forgiven. Just like how we arent suppose to eat pigs rabbits cut our hair women dressing like men ( Jeans were once concidered to only be worn by men ) the bible says that God and Jesus will forgive you so sex or not it doesn't really matter and on top of it all sins are equal and if people will get up every day have a peice of bacon and tell someone striaght out they will eat it again well then a two gay men can say we have sex and will have it again it and if you want to get technical if you want to figure out if what they say is true or not you will have to see just whos side you agree with. Some people say that 12 men in roman times picked and choosed and changed the bible to have control over roman which means if you go by that well then they could just be BSing everyone for control. Not to mention this was written after Jesus died many many years after Jesus died so really no one knows if it was changed during the passage of the story in the first place.

Unfortunately, as with many modern thinkers, you have misinterpreted the message of forgiveness and salvation. Yes, we are forgiven all our sins,when we acept jesus as saviour, but there are conditions attached. Despite catholic dogma which historically, has forgiven sins, via mechanisms from buying dispensations for them, to death bed repentance and confession to cover a life of sins, the biblical truth and the words of jesus are clearer, simpler, and perhaps a bit harder.

When you repent; as jesus said, you must intend to "go and sin no more". The words, "I repent my sins, and ask forgiveness," are not enough. The heart and mind must also be in accord. Thus, if you continue to live, choosing to sin, you will not be saved. Forgiveness continues to cover our human weaknesses and frailities which predispose us to sin, but we must be actively working in our; hearts, minds, and lives to live our life, both according to god's laws and, by the lifestyle illustrated by jesus. Then, when we fall short of perfection, we will be covered by grace.

While some of the old testament laws were designed to promote individual and social health and harmony, and breaking them may not constitute sinful behaviour, it is still healthier to stick with them where applicable. Modern science has proven this.

On the other hand, the laws of god, especially those of the 10 commandments, but not limited to them, were reinforced in the new testament by both the words and the life of jesus. They do represent fundamental laws for living, by all god's people. If you choose not to be one such person that is fine, but if you seek to be a follower of the christian god, then his rules and laws apply to you, just as much as they did to a person in old testament times.

Thus, Northwest is correct as far as scripture goes, The act of homosexual sex is a sin, but so too is any act of sex outside the context of procreation. And for many good social, cultural and economic reasons, religion links this context to a state of marriage between two people.

While the actual format of the marriage may vary, it implies a life long commitment between a man and a woman, in which one of the main purposes is the protection/care of the woman during childbirth, and while children are dependent; and a basic unit for the care, nurture and education of the next generation of humanity.

This is why, in most religions, any sex outside "marriage" is considered "sinful". It breaks one of god's most fundamental laws, designed to protect humanity, through its potential destruction of the family unit. Be this a nuclear, extended, or tribal family structure.

Thus, while it remains a good ideal to not eat bacon and to dress and present yourself modestly, it is absolutely essential to; be faithful, love your parents, not kill unlawfully etc. because these are the basic laws god has set for the protection of our society. About half the 10 commandments reinforce our duty to god, while the others lay out secular laws of behaviour.

Again, all these boil down to "I'm better than you," "My girlfresh is hotter than yours," "My penis is bigger than yours," "My sexual technique is the only way," "My belief system (religion/philosophy) is the only RIGHT one," etcetera, etcetera.

So women getting it on with each other is ok in gods eyes ??? Or only if the ladies marry ?

This is very laughable! Aren't there enough people in the world by this time? Honestly, things in general would probably be better if more people were homosexuals...

Hey remember according to the bible god created EVERYTHING even homosexuals as you said it wasn't their choice

So people shouldn't have sex with someone they love because some silly little ol book says not to ?

Oh yeah the bible is seething with good old fashioned family values !! Don't get me started because it won't be pretty.