Gay Marraige

[LukeMan]

Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem

Second...Why is anal more un-natural than oral? I know I asked that, but you didn't answer it. Instead you posted some link about something I never disagreed with.

I'll agree, If you look at "nature," sex is meant for one thing. Procreation. Well that means any other sex act is and should be considered "un-natural" right?
Oral, anal, the use of contraceptives..etc..etc..

It's un-natural because the anus is only meant for outputting, not for inputting (insertion). You input stuff into the mouth all the time, so that's totally natural (Especially when depositing nutrients rich in protein). Inserting these protein-rich nutrients into the anus is a waste.

 

[Zysoclaplem]

Originally posted by: LukeMan

Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem

Second...Why is anal more un-natural than oral? I know I asked that, but you didn't answer it. Instead you posted some link about something I never disagreed with.

I'll agree, If you look at "nature," sex is meant for one thing. Procreation. Well that means any other sex act is and should be considered "un-natural" right?
Oral, anal, the use of contraceptives..etc..etc..

It's un-natural because the anus is only meant for outputting, not for inputting (insertion). You input stuff into the mouth all the time, so that's totally natural (Especially when depositing nutrients rich in protein). Inserting these protein-rich nutrients into the anus is a waste.

*sigh*
Now you are just being silly.
lol

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: LukeMan

Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem

Second...Why is anal more un-natural than oral? I know I asked that, but you didn't answer it. Instead you posted some link about something I never disagreed with.

I'll agree, If you look at "nature," sex is meant for one thing. Procreation. Well that means any other sex act is and should be considered "un-natural" right?
Oral, anal, the use of contraceptives..etc..etc..

It's un-natural because the anus is only meant for outputting, not for inputting (insertion). You input stuff into the mouth all the time, so that's totally natural (Especially when depositing nutrients rich in protein). Inserting these protein-rich nutrients into the anus is a waste.

Then why does it feel good?

 

[VIAN]

Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong

Originally posted by: RBachman

Originally posted by: paulw86
Regardless of what the Christians believe, being gay is against nature. I don't think I need to go further on that. If someone wants to be gay, SO BE IT. Personally I think gay marriage is unnecessary.

Is it? Homosexuality has been witnessed in many species of animals and has been around in our own species for millenia, dating back possibly even to before recorded history. I think it's just one more genetic variation, an example of the flexibility of DNA which leads to life's adaptability and thus success. A biological contingency plan. It would be interesting to see if it becomes more prominent as world population goes up as a sort of natural solution to overpopulation, but a study would take decades, maybe centuries, and be inherently flawed due to social norms masking true numbers.

Prove any of that.

Alexander and Ghangis Khan were supposed to be bisexual and gay respectively. Alexander, at least in the movie looked like he boned his own mother. - such sexual freedom.

Anyway, now to the proof, my grandma's dog was caught boning her other dog. Both were male. That's some proof of what he said. He makes some sense, I believe that there have been gay people for a really long time. Gay people are only doing what is natural. And what is something natural. Answer: Something that we have a desire to do without outside influence. I certainly know that Gay people aren't influenced to be gay.

 

[LukeMan]

Originally posted by: VIAN
Alexander and Ghangis Khan were supposed to be bisexual and gay respectively. Alexander, at least in the movie looked like he boned his own mother. - such sexual freedom.

Anyway, now to the proof, my grandma's dog was caught boning her other dog. Both were male. That's some proof of what he said. He makes some sense, I believe that there have been gay people for a really long time. Gay people are only doing what is natural. And what is something natural. Answer: Something that we have a desire to do without outside influence. I certainly know that Gay people aren't influenced to be gay.

great supporting evidence... Dog's sniff each other's asses and in many cases eat each other's poop (my dog would eat my cat's poop from the kitty litter). Would it be natural for a human to go around eating another human's poop?

P.S. Your grandma's dog prolly doesn't have any interactivity with female dogs, so he's forced to act out his sexual aggression the only way he can, with the only other dog available to him.

 

[quizzelsnatch]

Originally posted by: LukeMan

Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem

Second...Why is anal more un-natural than oral? I know I asked that, but you didn't answer it. Instead you posted some link about something I never disagreed with.

I'll agree, If you look at "nature," sex is meant for one thing. Procreation. Well that means any other sex act is and should be considered "un-natural" right?
Oral, anal, the use of contraceptives..etc..etc..

It's un-natural because the anus is only meant for outputting, not for inputting (insertion). You input stuff into the mouth all the time, so that's totally natural (Especially when depositing nutrients rich in protein). Inserting these protein-rich nutrients into the anus is a waste.

how is this an argument against gay marriage? Many things we do in society is a waste (why have myspace? there is not need for it, infact, why have the internet at all?). Should those be banned too then?



Anyways: I am wondering how it is that you guys really can argue against gay marriage. Yes, it's against your religion, it's not "natural," etc. etc. However, does it really affect *YOU*. Are YOU getting married to someone of the same sex? Are YOU going to "hell" because of it? are you NOT procreating? Hell, if anything you should ENCOURAGE gays, they'll breed themselves out of existence, right?

 

[quizzelsnatch]

Originally posted by: LukeMan

Originally posted by: VIAN
Alexander and Ghangis Khan were supposed to be bisexual and gay respectively. Alexander, at least in the movie looked like he boned his own mother. - such sexual freedom.

Anyway, now to the proof, my grandma's dog was caught boning her other dog. Both were male. That's some proof of what he said. He makes some sense, I believe that there have been gay people for a really long time. Gay people are only doing what is natural. And what is something natural. Answer: Something that we have a desire to do without outside influence. I certainly know that Gay people aren't influenced to be gay.

great supporting evidence... Dog's sniff each other's asses and in many cases eat each other's poop (my dog would eat my cat's poop from the kitty litter). Would it be natural for a human to go around eating another human's poop?

P.S. Your grandma's dog prolly doesn't have any interactivity with female dogs, so he's forced to act out his sexual aggression the only way he can, with the only other dog available to him.

dog's eat each others poop because it gets rid of the scent and therefore leaves them less vulnerable to predators smelling them out. it's instinct. So, in conclusion, yes, it would be natural for humans to eat other human's poop. At least, 3,000+ years ago it would.

 

[SampSon]

The government just doesn't want more people to get in on the joint filing tax breaks, nor the child dependent tax credits.

 

[CKent]

Never ceases to amaze me the lengths people go to to justify any and all control they can have over others' lives. Sad when you think about what would be possible if we were to step forward as a species and put all that energy to productive use, rather than backwards as we have the past few years.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
I just popped in to see if the thread had disintegrated into flames yet. And it has.
For the record, my opinion is that the only reasonable solution is to provide civil unions for all and let churches marry whoever they please, let the acts remain separate as they ought to be.

Sounds fair to me.

The government shouldn't know the meaning of the word marriage, as it's a religious term.

 

[thepd7]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Cabages
I am hoping for that constitutional amendment.

Originally posted by: BD2003

Not to mention the fact that homosexuality was an integral part of the greek and roman civilizations, to which we basically owe our entire history to.

I had to laugh. I cant believe some of you people actually believe this ******.

Please read a fvcking history book - this isn't idle speculation, this is factual, from the mouths of the greeks and the romans themselves. They loved the cock.

If you really pay attention, they didn't screw men soely for pleasure. It was common for an older male to take a younger (15ish) male under his wing (screw him) to teach him how to pleasure a woman.

This doesn't change the fact that gay men just want love from a father figure or to belong. and that they spread aids.

 

[GeekDrew]

Originally posted by: thepd7
This doesn't change the fact that gay men just want love from a father figure or to belong. and that they spread aids.

Straight people spread HIV as well, what's your point?

Of course we want to belong, doesn't everyone?

 

[LegendKiller]

It's up to God to judge them when he seems them. GW isn't God, nor is anybody else against Gay Marriage, let them marry if they want, who are we to hold power over them? If God truly has a problem with it, he'll take it up with them when they get there. Otherwise, butt the hell out.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Cabages
I am hoping for that constitutional amendment.

Originally posted by: BD2003

Not to mention the fact that homosexuality was an integral part of the greek and roman civilizations, to which we basically owe our entire history to.

I had to laugh. I cant believe some of you people actually believe this ******.

Please read a fvcking history book - this isn't idle speculation, this is factual, from the mouths of the greeks and the romans themselves. They loved the cock.

If you really pay attention, they didn't screw men soely for pleasure. It was common for an older male to take a younger (15ish) male under his wing (screw him) to teach him how to pleasure a woman.

This doesn't change the fact that gay men just want love from a father figure or to belong. and that they spread aids.

That is certainly not the impression I got from reading various primary sources. Perhaps pleasure wasn't their sole purpose, but it was definitely a major one. It wasn't just limited to teaching young boys the "art of love". An interesting story I remember reading about was how the spartan men were kept so far apart from the women during adolescence, that they didnt know what to do with a woman when they got married. In order to get the spartan soldiers aroused, they dressed their women up as male soldiers.


Ironically, I was just reading a story in seed magazine today about homosexuality in the animal kingdom...apparently there are 450+ species - so many that the author of a study (a transgended stanford professor, no less) believes that our pure hetereosexuality is transient, and it is only a matter of time before we get back to the natural state of things, where men get gay with each other to strengthen social bonds, similar to the macedonian troops. Taking it a bit too far if you ask me, but there is a hell of a lot of homosexuality in the animal kingdom. Some interesting ones:

Male big horn sheep get it on regularly - in fact, if one of the sheep chooses to be straight, he gets shunned from the rest of sheep anal raping society.

The male bonobos don't do each other up the dirt road as I figured, instead they engage in "penis fencing", which sounds extremely painful, and apparently tends to end up with two bonobos with sticky fur. They rub each other down, and the females rub their nasties against each other EVERY TWO HOURS.

They didnt go into much more details on any other animals, but they did include a full list of species with recorded homosexual behavior. Some interesting ones.

African Elephant - I can't imagine what that consists of, but I'm sure it makes the whole savannah cry out in pain.
Dog/Cat/Hamster (Domestic) - It wouldn't be the first time I've heard of gay housepets...all those stories might be true.
Hoary Marmot - I don't even know wtf that is, but it sounds like a slut.
Sperm Whale - Can't say I'm surprised.
Vampire Bat - Must be bloody.
Walrus - I'm not sure why, but I'm not surprised.
Penguins - Same. Well dressed?
Barn Owl - All that "hoo-ing" in the middle of the night makes sense now.

Blue Tit, Tree Swallow, European Shag, Gray-Breasted Jay, Powerful Owl, - Great names for gay birds.

A few insects as well: Blowfly , Box Crab :Q, Cockroach, Screwworm Fly, Socialble Weaver, Southern Green Stink Bug, Southern Masked Chafer, Spreadwinged Damselfly...

And the absolute gayest (named at least) animal out there, and I swear I am not making this up:
The Guianan Cock-of-the-rock.

And before anyone asks, the source given by the magazine, which I'm sure is well sourced itself: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/031225.../104-8673673-7669547?v=glance&n=283155

 

[BD2003]

I just had to know what one looked like, and it doesn't disappoint. Judge for yourself:

Guianan cock-of-the-rock

 

[Abe Froman]

If you don't like Gay marriage, don't marry a gay person!

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: RBachman
Never ceases to amaze me the lengths people go to to justify any and all control they can have over others' lives. Sad when you think about what would be possible if we were to step forward as a species and put all that energy to productive use, rather than backwards as we have the past few years.

There is no better response than this, perfectly stated and sadly 100% true.

People opposing gay marraige, get the f' out of other people's business.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Today I learned that all christians are fundamentalists and haters and all liberals are gay and promiscous

:shocked:

 

[morkman100]

Originally posted by: gersson
Today I learned that all christians are fundamentalists and haters and all liberals are gay and promiscous

:shocked:

You forgot they're all atheists too!

 

[LittleNemoNES]

lol

I think its funny -- there never seems to be any middle ground. Buncha haters :disgust:

 

[mi1stormilst]

Here is the middles ground: Let the gays get married and butt hump all they like...that is what they wanna do right? We should all get to do what we want to do because we want to do it right? Lets make everything not only legal ... but acceptable. That way when I go the their houses and lop off their filthy little pee pees I won't have to got to jail. LOL! Yes I am kidding.

 

[imported_ceefka]

Originally posted by: LukeMan

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: LukeMan

Originally posted by: thepd7
I am against gay marraige because then they would stop sleeping around and spreading aids.

:laugh:

WTF is wrong with you two? You WANT AIDS to be spread?

just double bag it and you're like 99.9% safe

AIDS spreads very well without gay people. Just take South Africa as an example. Men over there spread AIDS by having intercourse with 2 year olds, believing that would cure it. They don't use condoms because the Vatican says condoms are bad. The church meant to say: condoms make way for promiscuity, but they didn't bother to clarify.

Double bagging is just about the worst thing to do. The chances of the condom ripping are vastly increased when you double bag.

To be on topic: In my country they allow gay marriage. Of course gays could already have a contract just like hetero couples who don't want to get married. That, however, is not exactly the same thing. Not legally and certainly not emotionally.

 

[tealk]

The Bible says it wrong, and I have to agree. We will ALL be judged one day before him. Will your name be in the book of Life?

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: tealk
The Bible says it wrong, and I have to agree. We will ALL be judged one day before him. Will your name be in the book of Life?

wtf is that supposed to mean?

 

[Brutuskend]

BTW Using the "It happens in Nature" argument doesn't hold water for me. Many things happen in nature that we as reasoning beings (or at least SOMETIMES reasoning beings) reject outright or at least know to be wrong. There are documented cases of one troop of monkeys completely killing off another troop of monkeys (genocide) it's quite common in many species of animals for a male to kill of the young of another male if they come across them, and cannibalism is also common with many animals, yet we don't assume those practices to be OK just because it happens in nature. Also when one male dog mounts another, it's usually NOT a sexual thing, it's a matter of dominance.