Kpop:
  But why a male would prefer a male rectum to female physiology is completely beyond me.

It seems anything that requires critical thinking is completely beyond that pine nut sized brain of yours.

(June 30, 2021 at 9:03 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:

(June 30, 2021 at 8:59 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I’m not going to requote the trash chain.

You objected to a person by saying there were better ways to reduce population, so we needn’t promote these sexualities, and at bottom, conceded that your idea of captive female resources probably wasn’t the best way to get laid.

Didn’t even notice?

I am not sure why you take these sidenotes so literally. It's really not hard to understand why homosexuality doesn't benefit survival and procreation, I don't even get why we're arguing about this.

I don’t know why you keep saying silly shit and arguing with yourself from post to post... and I guess it’s just on brand for you to forget that we’re arguing this because you keep insisting...

You simultaneously can’t stop saying this shit and can’t get far enough away from it once you’ve said it. That, might be a pathology......

Quote:I am not sure why you take these sidenotes so literally. It's really not hard to understand why homosexuality doesn't benefit survival and procreation, I don't even get why we're arguing about this.

Nor does it harm it in any relevant way. Nor does it matter if it benefits survival and procreation. That doesn't make it wrong. And your definition of natural is still bullshit . Natural is whatever occurs in nature as i already pointed out and you failed to refute (seriously barking )

He doesn’t care about any of that, he was just trying it on.

He’s worried about god, and I have to wonder...does he or does he not believe that all is the will of his god. You see two dudes fuckin, god wills it!

Am I missing something here?

(June 30, 2021 at 9:03 pm)tackattack Wrote: I had to skip pages 6-10 this is a hot mess. Let’s use your definition then Klor- “ by natural = any action that serves our instincts of survival+procreation” could finding love serve our instincts for survival within a society? If u answer yes and sexual orientation is currently estimated @25% genetic according to your article; fulfilling the need to be loved by whatever you deem fit serves individuals. Whether you get it, or whether u have oughts that get in the way is irrelevant. It’s good for people to find love and harmony. Have you been helping that end or are u too worried about your tail end being violated?

Homosexuality is as condemned in my religion as it is in yours. There exist some biblical passages mentioning Sodom and Gomorrah, if I recall that correctly. It's really hilarious that a christian is seriously apologising for homosexuality. 

Words like love and harmony aren't exactly very precise labels one can use to articulate an apology for men-on-men sex. Tell me, if you find love and harmony with your neighbor's wife, should we encourage you to express you love to the lady, or, rather, tell you there are more serious considerations like minimizing harm, seeking procreation, providing a stable environment for our offspring, etc. than your vague emotions of love/harmony , or your interest for my tail end ?

---

(June 30, 2021 at 9:14 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: He doesn’t care about any of that, he was just trying it on.

He’s worried about god, and I have to wonder...does he or does he not believe that all is the will of his god.  You see two dudes fuckin, god wills it!

Am I missing something here?

All abrahamic religions condemn homosexuality. God purportedly destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, and will do the same to all homosexuals in the purported afterlife. Once one accepts the religious premise, it's impossible to defend homosexuality, as tackattack ridiculously tried above

---

(June 30, 2021 at 9:09 pm)Helios Wrote:

Quote:I am not sure why you take these sidenotes so literally. It's really not hard to understand why homosexuality doesn't benefit survival and procreation, I don't even get why we're arguing about this.

Nor does it harm it in any relevant way. Nor does it matter if it benefits survival and procreation. That doesn't make it wrong. And your definition of natural is still bullshit . Natural is whatever occurs in nature as i already pointed out and you failed to refute (seriously barking )

What's your definition of right and wrong, Helios? I am really curious to know.

Quote:Words like love and harmony aren't exactly very precise labels one can use to articulate an apology for men-on-men sex. Tell me, if you find love and harmony with your neighbor's wife, should we encourage you to express you love to the lady, or, rather, tell you there are more serious considerations like minimizing harm, seeking procreation, providing a stable environment for our offspring, etc. than your vague emotions of love/harmony , or your interest for my tail end ?

So you 

1. Insert a whole bunch of shit into his argument he never implied. Which by the way by your own rules could achieve all the above 

2. Homosexuality isn't inherently harmful. There is nothing inherently good about procreation  and Gay families are just as stable as straight ones 

Christ you suck at this 

---

Quote:What's your definition of right and wrong, Helios? I am really curious to know.

So you're just going to sidestep the issue, are you? No surprise 

Might just be some of you that go full loon on the subject. I’m more interested in the possibility of there being things which happen outside the will of god.

I mean, my Islamic argument for homosexuality seems a lot stronger than your argument from nature against it. You see that, nothing that happens is outside of gods will and you’re not in a position to second guess what the big man has wrought.

Tell me I’m wrong.

When you have to rely on the yammerings of ancient scientifically inept goat fucking troglodytes, your argument is dead in the water.

god is make believe. allah is just worthless!

Well, obviously not to him. It’s his concern for a god that made him commit to being as offensively dumb and hateful as he could possibly be. So it seems like an argument from god might help him find the better angels of his own nature. We’ll see.

(June 30, 2021 at 9:23 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Might just be some of you that go full loon on the subject.  I’m more interested in the possibility of there being things which happen outside the will of god.

I mean, my Islamic argument for homosexuality seems a lot stronger than your argument from nature against it.  You see that, nothing that happens is outside of gods will and you’re not in a position to second guess what the big man has wrought.

Tell me I’m wrong.

You're right, OFC. Nobody is in a position to second-guess a deity. I am glad you understand that; many big problems like the problem of evil or even divine hiddenness are misunderstandings of this simple fact.

Tell me, @tackattack? Did you read this passage before in your bible ? 

"But the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the LORD." (Genesis 13:13 KJV)

---

(June 30, 2021 at 9:25 pm)no one Wrote: When you have to rely on the yammerings of ancient scientifically inept goat fucking troglodytes, your argument is dead in the water.

Oh... I see. So my argument from nature wasn't quite dead... right?

Now repeat after me : riding men is bad, it's disgusting.