Being gay is a fetish.

[Heywood]

Now lets go on to what I am saying.  A lot of people would accept these premises.

Premise 1: Homosexual behavior is unnatural and immoral.
Premise 2: Gays choose to engage in homosexual behavior.
Conclusion: Gays make a willful choice to engage in immoral behavior.

A lot of bigots would accept these premises. A lot of people keep out of other people's bedrooms and don't give a damn about what's happening there. Nosing into other people's sexual behavior is quite telling in itself. None of anybodys business what you're doing there, none of anybodys business what anybody is doing there, as long as it's between consenting adults.

You are arguing that homosexuality isn't immoral.  I don't see how it is immoral either.  However I could see how God would frown upon it.  A human being has enough capacity to reason out that boys are supposed to like girls and vice versa.  Choosing to engage in homosexual behavior is making a choice to act in a manner that is contrary to reason. 

I don't really care what homosexuals do as long as they are not hurting anyone.  I don't think God really cares either, but I do see how God could care.  If the standard He sets to judge a human is based on acting upon reason instead of instinct...then yeah I could see God "punishing" homosexuality. 

---

Now you don't refute the anti gay argument by using a different definition of natural then they are using.  Using a different definition than they are using is refuting a straw man argument.  When the anti gay crowd calls homosexuality unnatural they mean homosexuality isn't the usual and ordinary course of nature.

Define "usual" and "ordinary".

Well if were going to play the definition game, how about you define "define" and "and"?

If I were going to attack the anti gay crowd on their definition of natural, I would make the argument that just because something is not the usual and ordinary course of nature doesn't make it immoral.  Right handedness is the usual and ordinary course of nature for human beings...does that make left handed people immoral?

[One Above All]

A human being has enough capacity to reason out that boys are supposed to like girls and vice versa.

I love psychics, don't you?

Well if were going to play the definition game, how about you define "define" and "and"?

Dumbass comparison, and you know it.

If I were going to attack the anti gay crowd on their definition of natural, I would make the argument that just because something is not the usual and ordinary course of nature doesn't make it immoral. Right handedness is the usual and ordinary course of nature for human beings...does that make left handed people immoral?

I'm not asking how you'd attack an argument, am I? If I did ask, it'd be only so I could be sure to do the opposite.

[Brakeman]

You are arguing that homosexuality isn't immoral.  I don't see how it is immoral either.  However I could see how God would frown upon it.  A human being has enough capacity to reason out that boys are supposed to like girls and vice versa.  Choosing to engage in homosexual behavior is making a choice to act in a manner that is contrary to reason. 

I don't really care what homosexuals do as long as they are not hurting anyone.  I don't think God really cares either, but I do see how God could care.  If the standard He sets to judge a human is based on acting upon reason instead of instinct...then yeah I could see God "punishing" homosexuality.

A human being has enough reasoning capacity to see that being an albino is a freak against nature. They could also reason that their visual differences could freak the superstitious among us into killing them as demons and that their insistence of coming out of hiding may force the ignorant into bigotry and exclusion.

Simple reasoning..

Similar to being born gay.

[thesummerqueen]

Heywood, do you even know wtf sexuality is?

[One Above All]

Heywood, do you even know wtf sexuality is?

Sorry, but to imply Heywood might know anything about the topics he... "discusses" is hilarious to me.

[Anomalocaris]

A lot of bigots would accept these premises. A lot of people keep out of other people's bedrooms and don't give a damn about what's happening there. Nosing into other people's sexual behavior is quite telling in itself. None of anybodys business what you're doing there, none of anybodys business what anybody is doing there, as long as it's between consenting adults.

You are arguing that homosexuality isn't immoral.  I don't see how it is immoral either.  However I could see how God would frown upon it.  A human being has enough capacity to reason out that boys are supposed to like girls and vice versa.  Choosing to engage in homosexual behavior is making a choice to act in a manner that is contrary to reason. 

I don't really care what homosexuals do as long as they are not hurting anyone.  I don't think God really cares either, but I do see how God could care.  If the standard He sets to judge a human is based on acting upon reason instead of instinct...then yeah I could see God "punishing" homosexuality. 

---

Define "usual" and "ordinary".

Well if were going to play the definition game, how about you define "define" and "and"?

If I were going to attack the anti gay crowd on their definition of natural, I would make the argument that just because something is not the usual and ordinary course of nature doesn't make it immoral.  Right handedness is the usual and ordinary course of nature for human beings...does that make left handed people immoral?

If you could see "God", or what God "would" do, bozo, you need to stop wasting our time and immediately undergo the strongest possible psychiatric remediation therapy.

---

A lot of bigots would accept these premises. A lot of people keep out of other people's bedrooms and don't give a damn about what's happening there. Nosing into other people's sexual behavior is quite telling in itself. None of anybodys business what you're doing there, none of anybodys business what anybody is doing there, as long as it's between consenting adults.

You are arguing that homosexuality isn't immoral.  I don't see how it is immoral either.  However I could see how God would frown upon it.  A human being has enough capacity to reason out that boys are supposed to like girls and vice versa.  Choosing to engage in homosexual behavior is making a choice to act in a manner that is contrary to reason. 

I don't really care what homosexuals do as long as they are not hurting anyone.  I don't think God really cares either, but I do see how God could care.  If the standard He sets to judge a human is based on acting upon reason instead of instinct...then yeah I could see God "punishing" homosexuality. 

---

Define "usual" and "ordinary".

Well if were going to play the definition game, how about you define "define" and "and"?

If I were going to attack the anti gay crowd on their definition of natural, I would make the argument that just because something is not the usual and ordinary course of nature doesn't make it immoral.  Right handedness is the usual and ordinary course of nature for human beings...does that make left handed people immoral?

In other words you threw those words out without ever thinking clearly about them.

You are grabbing at straws that won't float even without the leaden mass of you holding onto it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

By Mezmo's logic then every moment not spent in attempts at reproduction are moments spent immorally.

... and masturbation is mass-murder.

Trust me, that's down in there, a little deeper.

---

Fuck me with an iron spoon until my eye balls pop out and I dance naked through the burning streets of Paris with a pair of tights over my head.

That's just for starters. Feed my brain to eleven vampire ducks who just firebombed a banjo factory.

You should have written songs for Frank Zappa.

---

Gay advocates are very quick to label people bigots, homophobes and repressed homosexuals when others have a difference of opinions about gender identity. Those kinds of ad hominem attacks reveal the poverty of their position.

The secular humanists have no response to the homosexuality going contrary to evolutionary advantage because that’s their argument of convenience when it comes to how they can be good without God. When it applies to sex they set aside the evolutionary justifications for human morality because it would be too inconvenient to for them.

Actually, Vorlon already proposed one possible reason why homosexuality might be better for the tribe in evolutionary terms.

As for being good without god, you'll need to first explain how a true Christian can be good with God, because I don't see a hell of a lot of that.  I see finger-pointing, smug sanctimony, and plenty of hypocrisy in gilded chapels from Rome to Orange County, but precious few people following Christ as an exemplar. The sexual peccadilloes of Christians runs the gamut and includes the gayness that their desperate to hide from judgmental twats such as yourself.

Own your bigotry. Quit being ashamed of what your own faith tells you to be true. Wear it as a badge of pride.

Oh, and don't forget to change your name soon.

---

Heywood, do you even know wtf sexuality is?

Last time m'boy saw pussy was when one gave him an eviction notice, probably.

[Esquilax]

First lets define natural.  There are two ways it is used in this debate.  The pro gay crowd defines natural as "occurs in nature".  The anti-gay crowd defines natural as "the usual and ordinary course of nature".  Very different meanings and each is equally valid.

It's starting to get laughable now: under both definitions, homosexuality is natural. It occurs over multiple species fairly commonly, making it usual, and given its unremarkable nature, it's also ordinary.

The only thing Heywood has left is to redefine "usual" and "ordinary" too, and at that point he's just playing word games and then demanding everyone else reimagine English to be whatever he wants.

[Heywood]

You are arguing that homosexuality isn't immoral.  I don't see how it is immoral either.  However I could see how God would frown upon it.  A human being has enough capacity to reason out that boys are supposed to like girls and vice versa.  Choosing to engage in homosexual behavior is making a choice to act in a manner that is contrary to reason. 

I don't really care what homosexuals do as long as they are not hurting anyone.  I don't think God really cares either, but I do see how God could care.  If the standard He sets to judge a human is based on acting upon reason instead of instinct...then yeah I could see God "punishing" homosexuality.

A human being has enough reasoning capacity to see that being an albino is a freak against nature. They could also reason that their visual differences could freak the superstitious among us into killing them as demons and that their insistence of coming out of hiding may force the ignorant into bigotry and exclusion.

Simple reasoning..

Similar to being born gay.

Being albino isn't engaging in behavior.  We are discussing behavior of free agents......not phenotypes.  

Suppose a person is sexually attracted to children.  Is that morally wrong?  No.  Molesting children is morally wrong.  Its the behavior that matters.  If we can expect pedophiles not act on their attractions because they are morally wrong, then homosexuals can be expected not to act on their attractions if they are morally wrong.

Does God think homosexuality is morally wrong?  I don't know.  The only reason I can fathom that He might think it wrong is the one I gave earlier.  Perhaps God expects us to be guided by reason and not instinct. Perhaps He expects us to know that sex isn't supposed to be homosexual.

---

If you could see "God", or what God "would" do, bozo, you need to stop wasting our time and immediately undergo the strongest possible psychiatric remediation therapy.

If you could read a post it would have been clear to you that I never claimed to know what God thinks or does. Describing a possibility is very different than making a claim.

Chucklehead, I know your not that dumb. It is a possibility you were simply stumped and decided to put forth a straw man so you'd have something to say. Its also possible you simply wanted to troll me.

[robvalue]

You have to consider the harm that is done. After all, that is what matters. Does it hurt anyone?

Yes. Every time one man slips it to another, baby Jesus gets another mouth ulcer.