Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Homosexuality, sin, choice or biology?


Jor-el

Recommended Posts

What happened then?

You said "In history we have had homosexual societies which collapsed".

However, I can't seem to find the original post. Only my quoting of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you get of this friggin "gay" thing already?

I have zero problem if a "gay" couple adopts a child --- as long the couple consists of a male and a female.

TWO MEN are by definition not a good environment for a child.

And to claim that the fact that two men hump each other has a mystical effect on the situation is crazy, to say the least.

What the adults do and not do to each other in the bedroom should be COMPLETELY irrelevant for the child. There are plenty of sexless couples in the world, and nobody has a problem with that.... except, apparently, the self-declared gay rigths activists.

Sheesh.

Who claimed anything other than ordinariness about gay couples ??

Every couple should be considered on their own terms, as social services do, and there should be no blanket ban on two men adopting or having a child by some other means.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who claimed anything other than ordinariness about gay couples ??

You do, obviously.

Or are you also saying that two heterosexual men should be allowed to adopt children?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In history we have had homosexual socities which collapsed.

To which you pointed to Amazons (a fictional myth) as an example.

Maybe I misunderstood your intent here, but it seems fairly plain that you implied that they collapsed because of homosexuality.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said "In history we have had homosexual societies which collapsed".

However, I can't seem to find the original post. Only my quoting of it.

You see Amazons in these days?

Let me explain my stance, this is what I said pages back

And one more thing which I found interesting. LGBT community often say we are not in middle ages. Like they are doing something new. Something revolutionary.

Truth is that they dont. They arent revolutionary by any means. In history we have had homosexual socities which collapsed. So nothing new here.

Same old story. Only this time we have science which might found out reason why is higher rate of suicidies among LGBT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do, obviously.

Or are you also saying that two heterosexual men should be allowed to adopt children?

Yes I think a married couple of homosexual men should be considered for adoption based on the soundness and stability of their relationship - just like any heterosexual couple.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then provide evidence.

i don't know if it's a simple lack of understanding what people are saying to you, or just pigheadedness, but this is yet another example of the things PA remarked on. This reply doesn't make sense.

Edited by Colonel Rhuairidh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To which you pointed to Amazons (a fictional myth) as an example.

Maybe I misunderstood your intent here, but it seems fairly plain that you implied that they collapsed because of homosexuality.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Br Cornelius

Read above. Context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see Amazons in these days?

Let me explain my stance, this is what I said pages back

And one more thing which I found interesting. LGBT community often say we are not in middle ages. Like they are doing something new. Something revolutionary.

Truth is that they dont. They arent revolutionary by any means. In history we have had homosexual socities which collapsed. So nothing new here.

Same old story. Only this time we have science which might found out reason why is higher rate of suicidies among LGBT.

I really don't understand your point. homosexuality does nothing to effect the sustainability of a culture - it is irrelivant. There has never been a homosexual culture populated exclusively by homosexuals so there is no example in history of where homosexuality caused the collapse of a culture.

Its all just a bit bizarre.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't know if it's a simple lack of understanding what people are saying to you, or just pigheadedness, but this is yet another example of the things PA remarked on. This reply doesn't make sense.

I dont have problems that my posts dont make sense to you. So I will not try to justify them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't understand your point. homosexuality does nothing to effect the sustainability of a culture - it is irrelivant. There has never been a homosexual culture populated exclusively by homosexuals so there is no example in history of where homosexuality caused the collapse of a culture.

Its all just a bit bizarre.

Br Cornelius

If you dont understand my point from quote I used what can I say. I was clear. As diamond.

LGBT are nothing revolutionary by any means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont have problems that my posts dont make sense to you. So I will not try to justify them.

Actually I don't know if it is a problem caused by your simple lack of understanding, or whether it is just out of a desire to irritate and annoy people, or trolling as it's popularly known. The way you reply to people doesn't make sense, and then you say it's their fault that they don't understand you. No, it's your fault, because your posts do not make sense, either because of your lack of understanding or because you do it deliberately.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you dont understand my point from quote I used what can I say. I was clear. As diamond.

LGBT are nothing revolutionary by any means.

Who said they were, it has always been my position and most everyone heres position that homosexuality is entirely natural and has existed at all times in all cultures. your arguing with yourself - but you did specifically state that homosexuality caused collapse of culture. Maybe it is your poor English - but that is how it reads and that is how people have interpreted it.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who said they were, it has always been my position and most everyone heres position that homosexuality is entirely natural and has existed at all times in all cultures. your arguing with yourself - but you did specifically state that homosexuality caused collapse of culture. Maybe it is your poor English - but that is how it reads and that is how people have interpreted it.

Br Cornelius

No I didnt. I said that they collapsed. Not providing reasons. Trust me collapse of civilization is PRIME reason why Im interested in studing history. Choose one... Maya, Vikings on Grenland, Khmers..Reasons are complex. Very complex. Part I found interesting is when sociology got involved. Social alienation. ..If you want I can find several my posts on UM where I claim that reason why I study history is collapse of civilization, rise of it, why history of human history is written differently in last 10 000 years.

So NO! I was clear. My English is bad. It has Russian Japanese accent. But in this case I dont think its lanuage barrier. Its that some member see what they want to see.

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why did you bring up the collapse of civilizations and use homosexuality in the same post. What relevance has homosexuality got to a discussion of collapse of civilization, or more importantly what relevance has civilization collapse got to homosexuality.

It was you, and you alone who started discussing the collapse of civilizations in a discussion on homosexuality. As I said, your logical thought processes are bizarre.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I don't know if it is a problem caused by your simple lack of understanding, or whether it is just out of a desire to irritate and annoy people, or trolling as it's popularly known. The way you reply to people doesn't make sense, and then you say it's their fault that they don't understand you. No, it's your fault, because your posts do not make sense, either because of your lack of understanding or because you do it deliberately.

I will let that to administrators to judge. But objective ones. Also about this insulting post.

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why did you bring up the collapse of civilizations and use homosexuality in the same post. What relevance has homosexuality got to a discussion of collapse of civilization, or more importantly what relevance has civilization collapse got to homosexuality.

It was you, and you alone who started discussing the collapse of civilizations in a discussion on homosexuality. As I said, your logical thought processes are bizarre.

Br Cornelius

No I didnt. I stated that they collapsed. Meaning they are looong history by now. Meaning LGBT is NOT revolutionary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I didnt. I stated that they collapsed. Meaning they are looong history by now. Meaning LGBT is NOT revolutionary.

Who claimed that LGBT was revolutionary ? It is natural, omnipresent, common.

So you admit that LGBT played no part in the collapse of civilizations ?

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see Amazons in these days?

Let me explain my stance, this is what I said pages back

And one more thing which I found interesting. LGBT community often say we are not in middle ages. Like they are doing something new. Something revolutionary.

Truth is that they dont. They arent revolutionary by any means. In history we have had homosexual socities which collapsed. So nothing new here.

Same old story. Only this time we have science which might found out reason why is higher rate of suicidies among LGBT.

No, we don't see them these days. Thus you can't prove they were lesbians.

The revolutionary concept is acceptance.

By the bloody way, you have absolutely not proven that there have been homosexual societies that have collapsed. You keep siting the Amazons. Well, do a little more research. They're shrouded in mystery.

Saying that a society of female warriors were homosexuals only furthers the "butch" lesbian staereotype. Come off it.

I have told you the reason so many times. I don't see why you won't open your eyes! There is a difference between correlation and causation. Since you claim to like science and reason so much, you should be able to understand this mind numbingly simple concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you admit that LGBT played no part in the collapse of civilizations ?

Br Cornelius

I never claim they did.

Just before I go. My points is short are.

1.LGBT are nothing revolutionary

2.Im for homosexual marriges

3.LGBT must be educated about colon disease. As one we didnt mentioned like fissure, fistulas etc. Same as other heterosexuals.

4.We need more indenpendent studies from several different states about higher rate of suicides. Because there might be link between sexuality and psychological illness. Therefore we cant put children under the risk and do social experiments with them.

5. LGBT need to back off with idea changing traditional terminology. And in that cause we in our country organized Civil group which beat their arguments very well. So my advice for everyone who like traditional terminology is to found a group which will fight for cause in civil manners. You cant loose because you have your rights to be called father and mother. Not parrent. So by forming a group you are half way to the goal.

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, we don't see them these days. Thus you can't prove they were lesbians.

The revolutionary concept is acceptance.

By the bloody way, you have absolutely not proven that there have been homosexual societies that have collapsed. You keep siting the Amazons. Well, do a little more research. They're shrouded in mystery.

Saying that a society of female warriors were homosexuals only furthers the "butch" lesbian staereotype. Come off it.

I have told you the reason so many times. I don't see why you won't open your eyes! There is a difference between correlation and causation. Since you claim to like science and reason so much, you should be able to understand this mind numbingly simple concept.

Okay. If you think that is bad example, I admit and I will use ancient Greece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay. If you think that is bad example, I admit and I will use ancient Greece.

Wrong. Again.

They weren't a homosexual society and war was what caused their fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong. Again.

They weren't a homosexual society and war was what caused their fall.

yes they are. A.Greeks beside wife, mistress usualy have had male friend.

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you get of this friggin "gay" thing already?

I have zero problem if a "gay" couple adopts a child --- as long the couple consists of a male and a female.

TWO MEN are by definition not a good environment for a child.

And to claim that the fact that two men hump each other has a mystical effect on the situation is crazy, to say the least.

What the adults do and not do to each other in the bedroom should be COMPLETELY irrelevant for the child. There are plenty of sexless couples in the world, and nobody has a problem with that.... except, apparently, the self-declared gay rigths activists.

Sheesh.

Your arguement is just like those that have no problem with two gay people getting married... as long as theyre a man and woman.

Honestly you need to get a grip. People talk about Two adults in a committed relationship (two men or two women) haing children. But every time you come in and say something, it's not about the committedness or staility of the relationship, it's about them 'humping' which really isnt the point.

I aree, what people do in the bedroom is irrelevent when it comes to child rearing but you dont seem to actually realise that when you make the whole thing about men 'humpin'.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes they are. A.Greeks beside wife, mistress usualy have had male friend.

More broad brush stereotyping - how many people can you offend in one thread :tu:

Nice work.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.