Homosexuality

[Sun Devil]

????....actually, your last quote pretty much destroys your argument......if its non-specific, it isn't homosexuality...

I was responding to the question of why dogs hump animate/inanimate objects.

 

[Ishmael Pequod]

I was responding to the question of why dogs hump animate/inanimate objects.

It feels good.

 

[maineman]

It feels good.

the voice of personal experience, no doubt.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Not to mention the men's room at the churches of JPP folk.....

and yet, here you are mentioning it......must be a christophobe liberal, can't resist it.......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I was responding to the question of why dogs hump animate/inanimate objects.

same reason these tortoises are humping inanimate/barely animate objects......automatic thread fail....good job....././

 

[Damocles]

Did you get the turtles married yet?

 

[PostmodernProphet]

too late.......one eloped with a granite boulder......

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Not to mention the men's room at the churches of JPP folk.....

And then there's your work and home.

 

[Auster]

So, how you know them there is ghey turtles?

Have they ever been around females?
In addition, isnt it established that many animals will folloe their whims and and seek short term rewards? Hasnt evolution shaped actions?

If you want to compare these turtles to mammels with a completely different set of needs go for it, but I think this is just a case of displaying the clear exception.

 

[Truth Detector]

I'm not sure what the point of the original post was in this thread...

If it was to show "homosexuality" in animals other than humans in order to somehow argue that it should thus be viewed as "okay" by everyone, there is also murder among animals other than humans, even cannibalism.... In fact, the black widow has been known to poison and kill her own mate. Is the argument that humans are to make decisions based on how the rest of the animal kingdom behaves at any given time? Because that could become quite an interesting discussion...

If it was to somehow mock those who believe that God created those animals that are acting in a perceptibly "homosexual" way, I think even that attempt falls flat on its face, since the ones who generally believe God created those animals also consistently believe that God created humans in His image- which is to say that they believe humans are special and were not only created to have dominion over other animals but to have higher conscience capabilities that other animals weren't made to have, making moral decisions that the other animals were not created to make. Many of these same people also believe that when God cursed the ground after "The Fall" ("Cursed is the ground because of you..." Gen.3-17), everything on earth that had been protected from death and decay had those protections removed because of this curse- which is to say that any number of actions animals make which would be questioned by a society of humans, may have begun after (and because of) this curse.

Interestingly, in Isaiah 65:25 it says: "The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, and dust will be the serpent's food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain," says the LORD." ...It could be argued that this verse demonstrates (to some degree) how God would have wanted His creation to live had it not been for "The Fall" of man, and that if He was to have a holy area on earth, this is how harmonious things would have been among the animal kingdom...

Brilliant post; it is refreshing.

 

[Truth Detector]

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

How do you account for a young female dog humping a stuffed animal?

Moron.

"Sugarland Veterinary Behaviorist Dr. Lore Haug says most of the time humping is “merely a nonspecific sign of arousal.”

See Reference:http://www.michaelbaugh.com/2011/11/06/the-truth-about-humping/

MORON

The point was way over your empty pointy head wasn't it dunce?

I bet you also thought that making your font larger would make you appear less stupid; it didn't.

Run along ass clown; life's too short for your special brand of stupid.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

My fixed female Labrador Retriever does the same thing with sofa cushions. It's not homosexuality, it's a demonstration of dominance and acceptance of submission.

Turtles are not pack animals and do not display dominance. Also, numerous other examples of homosexuality are found in nature that have nothing to do with dominance.

It is apparent you don't know much about animals either.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

Another dunce who thinks that if someone doesn't believe in gay marraige, they must be against gays.

That is not being a dunce. That is being logical.

If you are not against gays, why would you care if they marry? It has no effect on you at all. So the only reason you would object (and stick your nose in their business) is because you are against gays.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I got two giant tortoises in my back yard. Today they were trying to have sex, although Koko (top), couldn't seem to find the sweet spot on Bob (bottom). Both these reptiles are dudes. Nature or nurture homophobes?

I got a pic of it. Koko was grunting. Bob was just chilin. Ill see if i can get the pic here.

Maybe if these 150 year old animals found Jesus, they'd refrain from oofing.

Note - Bob is ALWAYS on the bottom.

Bob - catcher
Koko - pitcher

Got it.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

How many days did it take for him to get up there?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

seventeen states.... suck on it.

You may wish to reword the above... or risk him taking you up on that.

 

[Truth Detector]

Turtles are not pack animals and do not display dominance.

And so according to you, that indicates they are gay? Got stupid?

Also, numerous other examples of homosexuality are found in nature that have nothing to do with dominance.

Yes there are, and in NONE of them do people point and say “look at that normal behavior!”

Do you get it yet?

It is apparent you don't know much about animals either.

Apparently you know nothing about them or you wouldn’t try to make such ridiculously stupid claims about them.

It never occurs to leftist dunces that the photo could easily have been staged in a weak dimwitted effort to rationalize gay behavior and a moronic attempt to argue it is “normal.”

It’s really a stupid lame argument that only a complete and utter fool will make, or a dishonest hyper partisan dunce trying to forward an agenda.

 

[Truth Detector]

That is not being a dunce. That is being logical.

There’s nothing logical about dishonest strawman claims. I am totally against the concept of “gay” marriage because it is a really stupid concept to me.

But that doesn’t make me “against gays.”

If you are not against gays, why would you care if they marry?

Because marriage is a traditional concept to ensure strong caring families that nurture the children they wish to create through marriage.

I know it is a concept beyond dishonest partisans; but if you have no intent to procreate, why bother getting married? You need a piece of paper to show your love? If so, why?

I believe that the willful efforts by Leftist ideologues to destroy what traditional marriage is all about leads to a steady erosion of the society as we are witnessing in many parts of the country today.

The primary source of most criminal activity leads back to broken families and single parent households. But you have to see past your ideological dysfunction to comprehend this reality.

Those on the "gay marriage" bandwagon now attempt to argue that being gay is perfectly normal; but it is not either morally, societally and naturally. This doesn't mean we should hate gays; just acknowledge what it actually means. Gender confusion and perhaps something not quite right in the brain that causes same sex individuals to prefer their own sex rather than as nature intended for procreation. Pretending it is something else is disingenuous and incredibly stupid.

It has no effect on you at all. So the only reason you would object (and stick your nose in their business) is because you are against gays.

Wrong again as stated above; but now you’re just being a willful partisan dunce stuck on stupid.

Carry on.

 

[MAGA MAN]

I got two giant tortoises in my back yard. Today they were trying to have sex, although Koko (top), couldn't seem to find the sweet spot on Bob (bottom). Both these reptiles are dudes. Nature or nurture homophobes?

I got a pic of it. Koko was grunting. Bob was just chilin. Ill see if i can get the pic here.

Maybe if these 150 year old animals found Jesus, they'd refrain from oofing.

Note - Bob is ALWAYS on the bottom.

Maybe they're just dumb animals.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

There’s nothing logical about dishonest strawman claims. I am totally against the concept of “gay” marriage because it is a really stupid concept to me.

But that doesn’t make me “against gays.”

If it is not your prejudice against gays, give me one way in which a gay couple being married would have an actual effect on you?

Gay couples who wish to be in a committed relationship should receive the same governmental benefits that straight couples receive. They provide the same benefits to society, with the sole exception of being able to procreate without assistance. And since straight couples who cannot procreate are still allowed to marry, your argument becomes either ignorance or prejudice. Pick one.

Because marriage is a traditional concept to ensure strong caring families that nurture the children they wish to create through marriage.

I know it is a concept beyond dishonest partisans; but if you have no intent to procreate, why bother getting married? You need a piece of paper to show your love? If so, why?

I believe that the willful efforts by Leftist ideologues to destroy what traditional marriage is all about leads to a steady erosion of the society as we are witnessing in many parts of the country today.

The primary source of most criminal activity leads back to broken families and single parent households. But you have to see past your ideological dysfunction to comprehend this reality.

Those on the "gay marriage" bandwagon now attempt to argue that being gay is perfectly normal; but it is not either morally, societally and naturally. This doesn't mean we should hate gays; just acknowledge what it actually means. Gender confusion and perhaps something not quite right in the brain that causes same sex individuals to prefer their own sex rather than as nature intended for procreation. Pretending it is something else is disingenuous and incredibly stupid.

So your answer to the need for more stable families is to not allow a group to marry based on your own biased opinions? If procreation is the only reason for marriage, why are those who cannot procreate still allowed to marry? If gays are not allowed to marry because they are not "normal", why is the yardstick of normalcy applied to straight marriages?