Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So let's see if I have this straight - Everyone on this thread (except one, and now two) believes that homosexuality is natural and normal and should be elevated above any religious opposition ... or the opinions of any and all dissenters. ... whom the proponents of H. believe are stupid and ignorant.
Wow! - Talk about narrow, bigoted, intolerant attitudes.
I don't believe that at all!
I do not believe that homosexuality is natural or normal.
However...
I don't believe what's natural and normal has anything to do with what's moral, and I certainly don't see any necessary threat to humanity's future in homosexuality.
The Pope is an ex-Nazi that presides over an organization that actively participated in the coverrup of systemic child sexual abuse over a span of several decades. Why anyone would care what his opinion is on any issue is beyond me.
The Pope is an ex-Nazi that presides over an organization that actively participated in the coverrup of systemic child sexual abuse over a span of several decades. Why anyone would care what his opinion is on any issue is beyond me.
Especially since the entire resource of the Pope and his cabal have been to amass wealth and nothing else of substance.
I love it when he comes out on a balcony and mutters some edict or another about how the rest of us need to feel guilty for some reason or other and he goes merrily about setting policy that not only forgives the child abusers that work for him but hides them as well.
Hey popey; melt your gold and wipe out famine on the planet, put your white robes where your mouth is.
The pope went out of his way to protect pedophile priests from law enforcement but bashes gay marriage. To him, homosexual behavior is ok as long as it's raping a kid and not done consensually, don't understand the logic behind that but also don't understand the logic of people actually giving the bloated corrupt Catholic church money in this day in age.
I do not believe that homosexuality is natural or normal.
It's natural because it exists in all of nature. It's normal in the sense that it exists in nature, however, it's not common among humans by percentages.
There’s strong opinions on both sides of this argument. What’s your take?
Gay marriage a threat to humanity's future: Pope - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/gay-marriage-threat-humanitys-future-pope-184113291.html - broken link)
It's natural because it exists in all of nature. It's normal in the sense that it exists in nature, however, it's not common among humans by percentages.
Keeping in mind that I for one don't think it matters how natural or normal it is (I see nothing MORALLY wrong with homosexuality in and of itself), some might argue that it's not natural because it doesn't conform to the usual or ordinary course of nature. It serves no reproductive purpose, and reproduction is considered the primary purpose of sex. They say it isn't "normal" either because it's so rare by comparison to heterosexuality. But of course that's even more insignificant to the question of right/wrong.
The point is that I can't bring myself to think of it as natural or normal, but I'm able to acknowledge that these factors make little difference. Sort of a "There's hope for you and your intolerance" to anyone who uses these arguments to attack homosexuality.
Keeping in mind that I for one don't think it matters how natural or normal it is (I see nothing MORALLY wrong with homosexuality in and of itself), some might argue that it's not natural because it doesn't conform to the usual or ordinary course of nature. It serves no reproductive purpose, and reproduction is considered the primary purpose of sex. They say it isn't "normal" either because it's so rare by comparison to heterosexuality. But of course that's even more insignificant to the question of right/wrong.
The point is that I can't bring myself to think of it as natural or normal, but I'm able to acknowledge that these factors make little difference. Sort of a "There's hope for you and your intolerance" to anyone who uses these arguments to attack homosexuality.
I agree, this is a silly semantics debate for the most part, and I also agree that natural/normal has no reflection of the morality of it. To continue the semantic discussion though, if your definition of natural is "conforming to the usual or ordinary course of nature" meaning that in terms of sex it's only natural if it serves a "reproductive purpose", then you must also consider people with a predilection for these following acts as unnatural:
masturbation, mutual masturbation, oral sex, anal sex, sex after menopause, sex after being diagnosed infertile
I would say Obama is a greater threat to humanity's future.
Almost every post has a stupid reply.
You get my vote on this one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
