Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
I married my wife when I was 64 and she was 63. Are you saying you favor denying us the right of marriage because "reproduction is impossible" for us, Sybil?
Homosexuality is not a sin
- Thread starter BartenderElite
- Start date
I married my wife when I was 64 and she was 63. Are you saying you favor denying us the right of marriage because "reproduction is impossible" for us, Sybil?
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Yes.
There is no "gay gene".
No, it is abnormal (for everyone).
Incorrect.
It is abnormal because it deviates away from the human reproductive process. That process is the 'normal'. Thus, homosexuality (a deviation away from that process) is the 'abnormal'. Even if 90% of a society's members were practitioners of homosexuality, it would still be abnormal behavior. This isn't a numbers game.
Incorrect.
Both men AND women are normal. A conceived child will either have XX chromosomes (woman) or XY chromosomes (man). This is the 'normal'.
Any deviation from this is the 'abnormal' (for example: XXY chromosomes, XYY chromosomes, and etc).
Again, this isn't a numbers game. This is about whether or not there is a deviation from a specific standard/pattern/rule.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Chanting. Mockery. Avoidance.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
There's no "straight gene" either, Sybil. Are you saying sexual preference is choice? If so, when did you choose between sucking dick and eating pussy? Did you experiment first to figure out which you liked better?
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
There is no "population problem". If you truly believe that there is a "population problem", then you should "take action" and off yourself first. Lead the way, Nordy...
Which is a complete 'mind-fuck' environment for a child to grow up in.
How does adoption "take stress off [of]" the "population problem"?
I appreciate them for what they contribute to society. I appreciate any hard work that they do, any good service that they provide, etc. I do not appreciate their practice of homosexuality because it does not contribute or result in anything fruitful. It is a waste, and it is harmful. It is not to be encouraged or applauded.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Dutchism.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
No they weren't. Nobody was stopping them from marrying besides themselves.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
RQAA. Leftyism.
That doesn't indicate it isn't an evolutionary advantage, obviously. Wolves evolved such that there is ordinarily just one breeding pair at a time. Many insects evolved so that there is only one breeding female out of thousands at any time. From an evolutionary perspective, an individual organism doesn't need to be able to reproduce to help its genes pass along. If you help your close relatives to be more successful with breeding, that also passes along your genes. In fact, statistically, if I gave up my life to save three siblings, I'd be doing more to pass my genes along than if I saved myself and let them die, since each sibling has 50% of my genetic material, on average, so three of them have 150% of those genes.
If a behavior that made reproduction impossible for the individual couldn't have an evolutionary advantage, there'd be no such thing as species with infertile classes, like female worker ants. How would the coding for that be passed on if it had no advantage?
Now, of course, that doesn't prove homosexuality functions similar to infertile female worker ants, benefiting the group even if those individuals don't reproduce. But it's certainly a possibility. And that's not even to deal with the fact that many homosexuals do, in fact, reproduce, before, after, or in addition to forming homosexual romantic partnerships.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
RQAA.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
Men can reproduce with women. Learn biology.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Are you saying gays had the same federal and state benefits of marriage in every state prior to 2015, Sybil?
Please link this fact if it's not just another delusion of yours.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
I love it when you prove you're a Sock Puppet Psycho, Sybil.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Yes it does. To put it another way, there is no such thing as a "homo gene", so homosexuality isn't an evolutionary thing to begin with. Homosexuality is behavioral, not genetic.
Humans are not wolves or insects. Homosexuality is behavioral, not genetic.
A human needs to reproduce to pass his/her genes along. There is no "evolutionary perspective" involved here, as homosexuality is behavioral (not genetic).
No it doesn't. You are not your close relatives.
You can't pass along your genes if you're dead or practicing homosexuality.
Made up numbers. Your siblings are not you.
Humans are not ants.
Homosexuality is behavioral, not genetic.
A "homosexual" (a practitioner of homosexuality) cannot reproduce. In order to reproduce, that person must first give up his/her practice of homosexuality, thus no longer being a "homosexual".
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Chanting. Mockery. Avoidance.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Bullshit, Sybil. You're the resident sock puppet psycho who is chanting, mocking and avoiding the truth, dipshit.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Yes. Practitioners of homosexuality, prior to 2015, had the same access to marriage as non-practitioners. The only thing standing in the way of their access to marriage was themselves (via refusing to marry).
Holy links are for non-thinkers. I have provided you with the reasoning behind my position.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Sybil should be more careful with her marbles then.