Gay Marriage

[Mabon]

Well, BillyHill and others have stated in the past that the function of sex is only for the continuation of the species. So I'm asking him if this is his position and does he think that humans only have sex, straight sex for that purpose?

Mabon.

[Stixxman]

But you know that sex is rarely 'JUST' sex. there are a myriad of complex things that goes with sex. Forming an intimate bond, no matter what the combination is, is an integral part of being human. It centers us and reassures us that what we fear, what all humans of any diposition fear, being alone, is not possible when sharing intimacy with another person.

[Bill Hill]

Billyhill, you keep putting forth the argument that sex (namely heterosexual sex) is for procreation that is it's main goal.

That is it's main purpose...that's the science position-- but sure, humans can justify other reasons.. for a whole load of reasons- from it feels good to god knows what.. I don't know how a pedophile justifies his actions.. or a **********c... it's completely alien to me.

Do you or think that people only have sexual intercourse solely for the purpose of having children? I think this question falls outside of religious morals and dogma but into biological imperative.

Mabon.

Well that's a good point how 'warped' to you want to go? seem the only scale-or marker we have is 'between two consenting adults' and that's it.

People don't seem to mind... everyone's quite accepting.. it's just when to start to push it into other people faces- or need a group, a political movement to justify your insecurities that problem's arise.

[Guardsman Bass]

Treatment of Homosexual Behavior

From 1968 to 1977, the Masters and Johnson Institute ran a program to convert or revert homosexuals to heterosexuality. This program reported a 71.6% success rate over a six-year treatment period. [2] Summaries of this program were published in their book Homosexuality in Perspective and in the American Journal of Psychiatry. [3]

At the time of their earlier work, homosexuality was considered a psychological disorder by the American Psychiatric Association.[1] In 1973 the APA determined that homosexuality did not fit the criteria for a disorder, although a state of distress or poor functioning brought on by dissatisfaction with one's sexual orientation did qualify.

Interesting... 71.6 success rate. Oh...

And how long-lasting were these conversions? Color me skeptical of the process, particularly since the biggest efforts to convert gays to heterosexuals (like Exodus International) frequently have had enormous problems with the "ex-gays" reverting to homosexuality, including apparently two of the Exodus Presidents.

In any case, how did they measure the homosexuality of these individuals? Contrary to public perception, human sexuality is hardly a narrow "Gay or Straight" choice; throughout history, people have dabbled in both. Just witness the Spartan culture of the Ancient Greeks, which goes to show that a large percentage of the population is probably bisexual to varying degrees. Converting a bisexual to (hopefully) exclusively practicing heterosexual sex is hardly an achievement.

[Bill Hill]

do you even KNOW any gay men?

Why yes I do. A whole variety of gay people and different people in general. But I guess you only want to hear the nice examples.

Often in these types of the debates, the gay rights side like conjure up a image of Mr & Mr nice gay. Dave and Jeff

They live down the road and own a cat... they just want to be accepted.. they just want to get married in a christian church...and declare their love.

A made up example designed to emotionally blackmail any rational debate and quite effective it is too.

But what about the otherside of the coin- Mr & Mr nasty bisexual- they don't care... man, women whatever.. if it's got a pulse they'll do it.

I've met this type so I know the exist.

They're like cenobites... they're motivation is...

THEY'RE INTO THE PLEASURES OF THE FLESH.

They want to get married in Church just to wide up and antagonise the christians.

Mind you, I guess there is a safety measure; if they do walk into a church, the windows explode.

[Guardsman Bass]

Funny. The gays in Massachusetts seemed content to get married by a civic official.

But maybe the civil official was a Christian!!!!!! ZOMG, bum-punchers oppressing Xians!!!!

Edited September 20, 2007 by Guardsman Bass

[Mabon]

That is it's main purpose...that's the science position-- but sure, humans can justify other reasons.. for a whole load of reasons- from it feels good to god knows what.. I don't know how a pedophile justifies his actions.. or a **********c... it's completely alien to me.

Well that's a good point how 'warped' to you want to go? seem the only scale-or marker we have is 'between two consenting adults' and that's it.

People don't seem to mind... everyone's quite accepting.. it's just when to start to push it into other people faces- or need a group, a political movement to justify your insecurities that problem's arise.

I asked you if this was your position not just the scientific position. But the answer main reason, not sole reason is telling.

I'd really rather not get too "warped" for several reasons. One I want to sleep sometime tonight and this is a young room.

Sex (again straight sex) main biological function is procreation or rather that is the obvious result. I don't think it's justifying to state there are a host of other reasons or sex would be just for procreation.

What removes: pedophilia, rape, and ********** from this argument is that consent is absent from these sexual encounters. Yes I added a rapist because rape is the act of force not sex and that is what all the others have in common. Pedophilia an act against a child, who does not have the same authority as an adult and can not give consent, a rape victim doesn't give consent and obviously a dead person can't give consent to a sexual encounter (even though this is the UM board. LOL! Got to lighten up somewhere in this!)

There is a fascinating article on the Bonobo Chimpanzees one of them at wiki. It talks about the different reasons of the varied couplings between the chimps. These I think are the 'sexy' chimps that you referred to earlier. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo

The Bonobo (who is our closest relative) sexual interaction is used to strengthen the bonds in the tribe. So just about every type of coupling imaginable happens with these chimps. These chimps are primarily fruit eaters with the occasional meat in their diets but unlike other chimps the occasional meat isn't from cannibalizing their own kind (or it hasn't been observed). Most disputes are settled with sex as at least one observer pointed out didn't make it a utopia because disputes need to be settled. Also interesting to observe that they are a matriarchal society.

I don't know if the Gay rights movement would have gotten such a boost if it hadn't been for the extreme position that President Bush used as his platform for presidency (this is the exact thing that you talked about in your closing statement) it was a push of a groups sexual/political position into the limelight.

So if you remove the biological imperative argument and recognize that sexual intercourse between 'consenting' adults is normal behavior this make the whole thing just a tempest in a teapot argument.

Mabon.

[Atheist God]

So these are your facts? Looks like subjective 'make believe' opinion.. so pedophilia and zoophile has only been observed in humans? This is crap.

Pedophilia is defined as the sexual attraction between adults and prepubescent youth.

Zoophilia is defined as sexual attraction by a human towards an animal otherwise known as bestiality.

There is also no evidence that this occurs in species other then human beings. You may believe this is crap but it is factual information. Both of the above are driven by different mechanisms ten homosexuality is. While homosexuality is typically driven by physiological and hormonal aspects the above to are driven by psychological factors and sexual pleasure.

What about those species of monkeys who 'do anything' that moves.

What species? I have never heard of a primate species other then humans that practice the 2 acts you mentioned.

Like I've said their may be a genetic gay and a psychological gay.. have I argued any different?

What you describe is a theory called 'Exotic becomes erotic' which was put out by Daryl Bem at Cornell University. This however is speculative theory and no evidence has ever really been found to support it.

Also I remember you used to post under the name 'ganja guru' when someone called you a pothead, you said that was equivalent of calling a blackman a n*****

That, btw was one of the most stupid comments I've ever read of this board.. funny but stupid- so please, spare me the personal attacks.

I actually do consider the term pothead a slur because it implies the stoner/dead head stereotype like Cheech and Chong for example that has been associated with cannabis users. So it may be a stupid comment to you a lot of us have tried to distance ourselves from this image to show that users can be just as respectable as people who don't use. So yes the term pothead is considered an offensive remark by many users. So don't go and call something stupid unless you understand it. BTW My name would still be GG but Saruman made me change it.

Somehow I have the feeling it will be a certain gay zoologist and his 'drawings' (not photos) of gay spiders and lesbian hedgehogs..

Somehow I get the feeling I am about to prove you wrong....

National Geographic

Live Science

Live Science (top 10 gay animals)

University of Oslo (2 pics of animals engaging in homosexual activity)

Wired (Includes pick of deer engaging in homosexual behavior)

Wiki article on Animal Sexuality also discusses animal homosexuality

Argue against 'religious fundamentalist' and you may have a point or look rational... come across science and the research usually falls flat on it's face.

As you've stated, shouldn't be too hard to prove as you've stated it's been scientifically proven. rock'n'roll. shouldn't be too hard to demonstrate.

What's the Claim again? "All Homosexuals are are homosexual due to their genetics"

NY Times (Article of study done using hormones)

U of Texas (study shows Auditory brains differ between Homosexuals and Heterosexuals)

NCBI (differences in Lipid levels as well as personality traits between homo and heterosexuals)

CS.CMU (another study that finds differences between homo and heterosexuals)

So there we have established that there are not only physiological differences between gays and straights but that numerous other species also display homosexual traits as well. Genetics are still in question and the debate is still raging on. However genetics probably play a role and the reason for this is because homosexuality is observed in other species as well. But one thing for certain is that homosexuality is in fact natural.

I'm just glad theirs no gay divorce..do you realize that most gays are not monogamous?...they chase butt like wolfs...i sa a study the average gay relationship lasts under a year...

Gimme a break most heterosexual relationships also only last a year... You do realize that most straight people are not monogamous either. Most of my relationships lasted in some cases less then a month that is until the one i'm on now which has lasted for over 3 years.

Actually, the incidence of homosexuality among catholic priests is lower than in the rest of society, where it is already (an extreme minority).

I don't think so... Since priests are not supposed to have any sex life at all and the ones who do hide it and would not admit to it anyway I don't think that there is anyway an actual statistic could be calculated. Due to the fact that in the US these priests would also likely lose their jobs it is in their best interest to stay in the closet. As for extreme minority an estimated 10% of the population are likely gay or bisexual etc which is actually quite a big chunk.

I would say that the church has a right to exclude people if they want to. I don't think it's Jesus' way but maybe they have that right. As long as they don't spend gay people's taxes by claiming to be non-profit and for the public.

Churches and other places of religion do take tax dollars in the form of faith based initiatives, grants and even in many cases faith based schools also receive government funding, to boot all churches and religions are tax exempt. Religious organizations in indirect ways do receive tax dollars (US). So they are more then happy to take money from gay people but not give them anything in return.

So technically they don't have any basis to refuse any tax payer the right to practice religious ceremonies. They also don't have a right to discriminate against people because they cherry picked a few words out of a book either. Already they don't follow everything in the bible in fact the same chapter Leviticus I think it's called says that you can kill atheists, disobedient children and so on. However they don't practice everything in the book because some things are not socially acceptable. If gay marriage was legalized and it became unacceptable to discriminate against gays they would likely change their views regarding homosexuality.

Now why did nature make sex so pleasurable? For a laugh? for an accident through evolution? Or motivation to procreate to insure the survival of the species?

Not all species that display homosexual tendencies experience sexual pleasure, sex for most species is driven by hormones even humans give off hormones. It has been proven that homosexuals only pick up on hormones emitted from the same sex as opposed to the opposite sex.

Looking for a hole is not a connection persay and while most sexual acts do involve a hole I would hardly call it a link.

treat us the same, but different right

They are already treated differently. Here in Canada where gays can get married they are treated as everyone else is treated and that is all they are asking for. They just don't want to be persecuted for simply being themselves which is what is happening now. Those doing the persecuting don't see a problem with what they do even though it clearly hinders social progression.

[Lt_Ripley]

Why yes I do. A whole variety of gay people and different people in general. But I guess you only want to hear the nice examples.

Often in these types of the debates, the gay rights side like conjure up a image of Mr & Mr nice gay. Dave and Jeff

They live down the road and own a cat... they just want to be accepted.. they just want to get married in a christian church...and declare their love.

A made up example designed to emotionally blackmail any rational debate and quite effective it is too.

But what about the otherside of the coin- Mr & Mr nasty bisexual- they don't care... man, women whatever.. if it's got a pulse they'll do it.

I've met this type so I know the exist.

They're like cenobites... they're motivation is...

THEY'RE INTO THE PLEASURES OF THE FLESH.

They want to get married in Church just to wide up and antagonise the christians.

Mind you, I guess there is a safety measure; if they do walk into a church, the windows explode.

how many times do I have to point out how wrong you are before you understand ? did you not pass highschool? is something wrong with your comprehension skills ?

WE CAN ALREADY GET MARRIED IN CHURCHES !!!!!!!!!!!!!! CHURCH WEDDINGS ARE NOT THE ISSUE !!!!!! it is having the government recognise the ceremony.

what part of that don't you understand ?

it's getting 'married' by the government that is the issue. an equal rights issue. Maybe it would help all to dismiss the term of marriage altogeather from government and from hense on in call it for EVERYONE a civil union. where as a church wedding aka marriage is not legally binding for anyone.

and ps = your likeness attached is wonderful

also why should it bother you whom the church marries ? or the government ? why are you so afraid of gay people and them having equal rights? do you feel you won't be able to feel they are inferior to you any more ? Do you think the church/christianity would disappear ?

why does it bother you so much ? are you gay and can't accept it ? you know the old saying and it does hold some truth. those who are secure in thier own sexuality don't care .

Edited September 20, 2007 by Lt_Ripley

[Bill Hill]

What species? I have never heard of a primate species other then humans that practice the 2 acts you mentioned.

That it.. it was feature in you top ten 'gay' animal sites- the Bonobo Chimpanzees, which actively engages in pedophilic behaviour!

The BBC refused to cover it... but the classed it as one group of animals they couldn't present in a program

David Attenborough was reported to have been physically sick when he witnessed their behaviour.

But I noticed the pro-gayside doesn't like to report the pedophilic side, soo excited are they at finding a new (cough) gay animal.

C'mon Atheist, they're monkeys, that 'species' does it to anything that moves.

[Bill Hill]

how many times do I have to point out how wrong you are before you understand ? did you not pass highschool? is something wrong with your comprehension skills ?

You still ranting away.. Lt Ripley.

It's not about Civil marriages it's about getting married in a church.. or mosque.. the op made that clear from page one.

As for your US government not recognizing it- remember this is the world section.

So yeah I can read. The rest of you irrational ad-hoc attacks really aren't worth commenting upon.

[Bill Hill]

Atheist god,

I'll read through the links you provide when I get the time.

[Atheist God]

That it.. it was feature in you top ten 'gay' animal sites- the Bonobo Chimpanzees, which actively engages in pedophilic behaviour!

The BBC refused to cover it... but the classed it as one group of animals they couldn't present in a program

David Attenborough was reported to have been physically sick when he witnessed their behaviour.

But I noticed the pro-gayside doesn't like to report the pedophilic side, soo excited are they at finding a new (cough) gay animal.

C'mon Atheist, they're monkeys, that 'species' does it to anything that moves.

They don't do 'anything' that moves they keep the sex within their own species, I will however acknowledge that yes this is the only other species that displays pedophilia. This is however not the issue though. This species is the closest relative to humans and share many commonalities with us they will also likely be extinct soon too.

You still ranting away.. Lt Ripley. rolleyes.gif

It's not about Civil marriages it's about getting married in a church.. or mosque.. the op made that clear from page one.

As for your US government not recognizing it- remember this is the world section.

So yeah I can read. The rest of you irrational ad-hoc attacks really aren't worth commenting upon.

Well the topic is about the legality of the issue I also feel that the religious aspect does also play into it as well. My view is that no individual, group or any organization has the 'right' to discriminate against another individual, group or organization. The government does not have the right to step in and tell people what to believe or how they should practice their personal beliefs. However the church or other places of religion themselves are organizations that serve the public or are supposed too without discriminating against the public or certain segments of the population that contribute to it.

If places of religion were private organizations then yes they would have the right to refuse but they aren't because they don't pay taxes.

[+DieChecker]

Well the topic is about the legality of the issue I also feel that the religious aspect does also play into it as well. My view is that no individual, group or any organization has the 'right' to discriminate against another individual, group or organization. The government does not have the right to step in and tell people what to believe or how they should practice their personal beliefs. However the church or other places of religion themselves are organizations that serve the public or are supposed too without discriminating against the public or certain segments of the population that contribute to it.

If places of religion were private organizations then yes they would have the right to refuse but they aren't because they don't pay taxes.

Well, I believe I can't just wander into a Mormon Temple, for example. But, maybe they are a private organization. Also, I (being a white male) can't attend an all womens college or a black university. At least the last time I checked, anyway.

If the problem is being married in a church and having it recognized, then the gay community is going to have to change the law. And, the way to do that is to lobby and get people to back you. And, the one time champions of the Gay Lobby, the Democrats (here in the US), have decided to go the way of the Religous majority to pander votes.

So, it is a fine discussion, but I don't see it happening. Maybe in 10 or 20 years the US will be ready. If you can't wait, why don't you move somewhere where they allow it?

[Lt_Ripley]

You still ranting away.. Lt Ripley.

It's not about Civil marriages it's about getting married in a church.. or mosque.. the op made that clear from page one.

As for your US government not recognizing it- remember this is the world section.

So yeah I can read. The rest of you irrational ad-hoc attacks really aren't worth commenting upon.

you have no clue. why no give it up already ? It's not about getting married in a church . I should know alot better than you. If the OP thinks that's the right gays are fighting for their dead wrong. as are you.

now be a good little boy and educate yourself on the matter or don't bother putting in your 2 cents worth of erroneous opinion.

as for it being the world section - my girlfriend is English so I'm just as involved.

here , try educating yourself on what exactly is being fought for WORLDWIDE

http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm

and ps - ranting is something someone like you does when they spout their pie hole without knowing what their talking about.

Edited September 21, 2007 by Lt_Ripley

[Atheist God]

So, it is a fine discussion, but I don't see it happening. Maybe in 10 or 20 years the US will be ready. If you can't wait, why don't you move somewhere where they allow it?

I'm Canadian and it is allowed here. Yes even the churches here marry gays because they could get sued if they don't since the national definition is no longer between a man and a woman. It's high time America caught up to their neighbors in the north.

[Mabon]

That it.. it was feature in you top ten 'gay' animal sites- the Bonobo Chimpanzees, which actively engages in pedophilic behaviour!

The BBC refused to cover it... but the classed it as one group of animals they couldn't present in a program

David Attenborough was reported to have been physically sick when he witnessed their behaviour.

But I noticed the pro-gayside doesn't like to report the pedophilic side, soo excited are they at finding a new (cough) gay animal.

C'mon Atheist, they're monkeys, that 'species' does it to anything that moves.

Well Billyhill, they (the Bonobo chimps) technically don't do it with anything that moves. There have been no sexual encounters reported outside their species nor between a living Bonobo and a dead one.

Yes it does state in the article that they will have sexual encounters with young members even infants, yet the article also reports that the death rate from such encounters, inside the tribe in the wild and captivity both are minimal to nonexistent.

Even though the BBC refused to cover them the first time that I had heard of them was on the Science or Learning channel as it's now called in the US.

Did Mr. Attenborough watch them in the wild or in captivity? The Bonobo are having a difficult time in captivity as sited in the article I posted a link to earlier, the reason given was that the young males are taken from their mothers and aren't being reared in the society/troupe so it is creating extra tension, tension they don't have in the wild, once they are reintroduced. The chimps in captivity are more violence prone then their 'wild' cousins.

And BillyHill they are chimps not monkeys. Perhaps ascribing motives, (human motives) to them is something that shouldn't be done. Observing their behavior was the reason that I linked to them. The behavior is more interesting then the anthropomorphic assertions and are extremely valuable. The Bonobo have no reasons to lie, which is a human trait, they do what they do unashamed or affected by human observation. Humans observed will lie or modify their behavior when observed, especially when they know they are being observed.

It seems sexual congress within the troupe is not just for procreation, but for recreation, bonding, comforts them in stressful times, so even without hinting at a human motive for their behavior the argument that sex in nature is strictly for procreation and the natural order is a false one. Do the Bonobo know why they do this, or even care? Probably not, they are doing what is natural.

Mabon.

[Neognosis]

What is your point?

Why do you continue to try so desperately to link homosexuality with pedophelia?

You do understand that they are two completely different things, right? It seems that your whole platform is that if we allow gay marriage, then we have to allow other sexualities that we consider immoral and illegal today.

I'm sorry, but this simply isn't true. Recognizing homosexual marriage is NOT going to bring us any closer to accepting pedophilia and **********.

I asked if you even knew any gay people because you seem so unbelievably misinformed. I think you should go talk to the gay people you claim to know and try to learn more about which you speak.

[Atheist God]

I asked if you even knew any gay people because you seem so unbelievably misinformed. I think you should go talk to the gay people you claim to know and try to learn more about which you speak.

I don't think he knows any.... I think he just says he does.

I on the other hand do know gay people hell i've even dated a few as I am Bisexual and I can tell you they would never associate themselves with someone like Billyhill.

[Bill Hill]

They don't do 'anything' that moves they keep the sex within their own species, I will however acknowledge that yes this is the only other species that displays pedophilia.

So you go to this from 'there are no examples of pedophilia' within the animal kingdom. Now you maintain... only one species.

Wasn't that hard to prove... the second link you provided did this.

Really Atheistgod your absolute statements are becoming some what irrational.

Only one species huh now are you quite 'sure..' or are you taking a leap of faith again.

I'm still reading your links.. which by the way, the majority it appears to be 'phony science website written by bloggers'.

examples to come..if you want. But I think you might already know this.

Top 5 GAY animals.. please...

So what are the top 5 homophobic animals..?

May I suggest the Lion being one of them?

Again on a BBC documentary an immature- just coming in puberty male kept trying to hump a Male mature lion. The Lion Tolerated this for a while before turning around and killing the 'gay lion'

Put placing human concepts/emotions upon animals is a fallacy.

Like this for example- Top 5 animal child killers.. may I suggest the lion again... and the mouse maybe..

Anyway..

Of course some animals are going to engage in homosexual behaivour- mistakenly- or maybe not mistakenly..why?

Because stimulation of the sexual organs 'feels good'

So, why has nature produced this effect?

Simple- to supply a 'motivation'.. to engage in heterosexual sex- to ensure the survival of the species.

Sorry, duck dodge and dive...make up new words if you want to but you can get around this fact. It's Basic Science.

Now, of course Humans being quite intelligent can 'justify' any action they want to.

Although whether they use logic or faith is another question.

[Bill Hill]

I on the other hand do know gay people hell i've even dated a few as I am Bisexual and I can tell you they would never associate themselves with someone like Billyhill.

Lol you taking a leap of faith again. You're wrong btw.. but how would you know? Do you think gay people all think the same way?

Maybe I should warn the men you've been on dates with.. since in another thread you admitted to having 'psychopathic tendencies'

Shudders....

Sometimes it really worries me who might be on these boards.

Edited September 21, 2007 by billyhill

[Bill Hill]

What is your point?

Why do you continue to try so desperately to link homosexuality with pedophelia?

I've explained 'why' several pages ago...

All sexual behaviour is connected in some way. In this case I brought it up, because atheistgod said there where no example of 'animal pedophilia'

Hence it was unnatural- and a man made concept. I proved him wrong -with the sample example he tried to use to demonstrate Homosexuality was natural...ie the Bonobo Chimpanzees.

Which engages in homosexual behaviour and pedophilic behaviour.

Or course it doesn't know one is 'ok' and the other's 'wrong' It's a, and here's the newsflash...an animal!

Edited September 21, 2007 by billyhill

[Atheist God]

I've explained 'why' several pages ago...

All sexual behaviour is connected in some way. In this case I brought it up, because atheistgod said there where no example of 'animal pedophilia'

Hence it was unnatural- and a man made concept. I proved him wrong -with the sample example he tried to use to demonstrate Homosexuality was natural...ie the Bonobo Chimpanzees.

Which engages in homosexual behaviour and pedophilic behaviour.

Or course it doesn't know one is 'ok' and the other's 'wrong' It's a, and here's the newsflash...an animal!

The animal in question is the only other species beside human which also happens the closest relative to the human species. I double checked this too this time, in fact they are the only other species to display sex in very much the same way humans do.

There is still a difference though and that is when humans do it, it causes severe psychological trauma and sometimes physical trauma to the child where as this does not appear to be the case with the Bonobo chimps.

Lol you taking a leap of faith again. You're wrong btw.. but how would you know? Do you think gay people all think the same way?

Maybe I should warn the men you've been on dates with.. since in another thread you admitted to having 'psychopathic tendencies'

Shudders....

Cause I happen to know lots of gay men and women to and people like you p*** them off.

As for my psychopathic tendencies i will admit that indeed i have had fantasies of taking another persons life. However if you would have continued to read on you would have also noted how I said I wouldn't. This is mostly because I wouldn't want someone to kill me and I understand that someone else's life is not mine to take. While I consider this in my opinion to be psychopathic what sets me apart is that I understand the concept of right and wrong thus i have morals.

Sometimes it really worries me who might be on these boards.

You never know do you, do you ever worry about your neighbors too.

What do you do all day just sift through my posts and what not that post was made a long time ago.

Of course some animals are going to engage in homosexual behaivour- mistakenly- or maybe not mistakenly..why?

Because stimulation of the sexual organs 'feels good'

Actually not all species of animal experience sexual pleasure like we do. This is mostly attributed to the fact that their sexual organs do not contain the sensitive nerve cluster that say ours and dolphins do.

Simple- to supply a 'motivation'.. to engage in heterosexual sex- to ensure the survival of the species.

Sorry, duck dodge and dive...make up new words if you want to but you can get around this fact. It's Basic Science.

Well thats funny because basic science tells me that not all species even experience pleasure when a female ovulates they emit powerful hormones that males of those species find irresistible. Males also emit hormones that females pick up on to as well as visual or audio stimulus which the female accepts or declines. Males often also fight to the death in some species to determine which ones engage in mating or the female mates with multiple partners to ensure that all eggs are ovulated etc.

Many aquatic species also do not even engage in sex the males simply release their semen into the water which is then absorbed by the females which results in seeding as well.

Not all species need pleasure as a motivation many do simply mate for the sake of mating and reproducing.

You would tell me I'm wrong and irrational yet you just made a completely false statement by saying that animals... A little hypocritical don't ya think. Especially since you have made 'drop the soap' comments and what have you and said you only like *spam filter* if it's 'girl on girl' etc. these aren't rational comments nor are they really that polite to make during a serious debate.

=========

Now enough about animal sex let's get back to why I started this thread in the first place 'Gay Rights' since it's now been established that homosexuality is natural.

[Neognosis]

All sexual behaviour is connected in some way. In this case I brought it up, because atheistgod said there where no example of 'animal pedophilia'

Hence it was unnatural- and a man made concept. I proved him wrong -with the sample example he tried to use to demonstrate Homosexuality was natural...ie the Bonobo Chimpanzees.

But what's your point? you aren't making any sense anymore, I can't even figure out what your points are. They are starting to become burried under a pile of homophobic ranting.

Can you answer this question for me, in a succinct and concise response that doesn't try to make some fantastic connection between gays and pedophiles:

What is wrong with two people of the same sex forming a commited sexual and emotional bond?

[Bill Hill]

Cause I happen to know lots of gay men and women to and people like you p*** them off.

So, me commenting on the scientific nature of heterosexuality would p*** off a gay person as much as me saying, I have fantasies of 'killing people'

Geez

What do you do all day just sift through my posts and what not that post was made a long time ago.

No, trust me, it stood out like a sore thumb. I was using this as an example that I unlike you don't assume anything about a poster- I just take what is written in their post.

As for my psychopathic tendencies i will admit that indeed i have had fantasies of taking another persons life. However if you would have continued to read on you would have also noted how I said I wouldn't. This is mostly because I wouldn't want someone to kill me and I understand that someone else's life is not mine to take.

Yes well, whatever the reasons, no offence but you don't sound like a pleasant person to be around..however it's not important to the debate, as is 'how many gay people I know'- I could tell you a few stories but I don't think you'd like them-but again nor is it relevant.

While I consider this in my opinion to be psychopathic what sets me apart is that I understand the concept of right and wrong thus i have morals.

Yes, good old morals- which is what separates us from the animals kingdom. Although some morals- such as is it immoral to homosexual is debatable-

I don't think it is immoral but I'm not religious.

Not all species need pleasure as a motivation many do simply mate for the sake of mating and reproducing.

Agreed. But without the pleasure sensation- homosexual behaviour has no purpose. In humans it's just another aspect of human sexuality.

Now enough about animal sex let's get back to why I started this thread in the first place 'Gay Rights' since it's now been established that homosexuality is natural.

Well yes, natural as in the sense 'everything is natural'... even the computer you're using in natural.

Whether the homosexual has a choice in their behaviour is still debatable, some may do.. some might not.

In fact as you know... bisexuality to me suggests that there is a choice.. pick'n'mix so to speak.

Btw I know some gay people who hate bisexuals for this very reason. Again, maybe not relevant but just to use it an example that probably you wouldn't like it.

See, when we label people 'homosexual' as the gayrights movement has- then they have already restricted the definition of themselves..with the aim to try and separate themselves from the rest of society and react to the rest of the 'non-gay' society. As civil right's movements go- the gayrights movement from a logical perspective is definitely one of the most weakest.

But I guess that's human nature- everyone wants to feel special and different.

Luckily not every gay person agrees with this 'reactionary' movement.