not disability exactly, no, but rather an impairment of sorts. in case you didn't know, their condition severely affects psychological and behavioral aspects of one of their biological functions - reproductive.DrunkFace wrote:
So you are classifying being gay as a physical disability then?
yeah because gay people can't biologically reproduce at all. dont be a fucking idiot shahter.Shahter wrote:
not disability exactly, no, but rather an impairment of sorts. in case you didn't know, their condition severely affects psychological and behavioral aspects of one of their biological functions - reproductive.DrunkFace wrote:
So you are classifying being gay as a physical disability then?
A "contagious physical disability," that is.DrunkFace wrote:
So you are classifying being gay as a physical disability then?
Eating one's young is also an instinct of some species. Does that mean the human race is broken if we don't do it?Extra Medium wrote:
The instinct to reproduce is THE strongest instinct in the animal kingdom. Gay people's reproductive instinct is obviously broken so how the hell does that NOT constitute a mental disorder?
ah true, its wide open thenunnamednewbie13 wrote:
He said animal kingdom.
Fixedunnamednewbie13 wrote:
Lifelong bachelors: mentally disabled genius.
nope. as no offspring is produced as a result, it's definitely not working as intended. as a said earlier, the reproductive function also has psychological, behavioral and social aspects, which are broken for homosexuals. and because those aspects can potentially be influenced by social means - propaganda - that is not desirable if the society doesn't need more gays produced. and, you know, we don't.Adams_BJ wrote:
The desire to reproduce is reflected with a boner and a need to bust a but. That is it. It doesn't go further. Gays like to bust a but with other gays. Working as intended
Last edited by Shahter (2013-09-06 22:36:19)
yeah because faggot kings and noblemen never had heirs right.Shahter wrote:
nope. as no offspring is produced as a result, it's definitely not working as intended. as a said earlier, the reproductive function also has psychological, behavioral and social aspects, which are broken for homosexuals. and because those aspects can potentially be influenced by social means - propaganda - that is not desirable if the society doesn't need more gays produced. and, you know, we don't.Adams_BJ wrote:
The desire to reproduce is reflected with a boner and a need to bust a but. That is it. It doesn't go further. Gays like to bust a but with other gays. Working as intended
now, it has to be said that most gays are totally normal and capable of being productive members of society in all respects which don't involve reproduction, that's why in everything that doesn't touch that i'm totally for extending all the privileges and state support everybody else is entitled to to homosexuals. that's definitely something we'll have to work on in russia, but, as i said before, we will find a way to do that without help from idiots dressed in ballet tutu's parading in from of our children.
What a shit idiot statement. I'm not talking about those instincts. I'm talking about ONE instinct. An instinct that is mutually shared by every animal in the animal kingdom. Do I need to remind you what it is or are you going to ask me if humans are broken because we don't lick our own assholes to keep them clean and free of worms?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Eating one's young is also an instinct of some species. Does that mean the human race is broken if we don't do it?
Lifelong bachelors: mentally disabled.
Pedophiles are working as intended too I guess? They are born that way after all.Adams_BJ wrote:
The desire to reproduce is reflected with a boner and a need to bust a but. That is it. It doesn't go further. Gays like to bust a but with other gays. Working as intended, it just won't have the end result. There is nothing wrong with them mentally.
Second largest event behind news years eve.Sydney Mardi Gras is one of Australia's biggest tourist drawcards, with the parade and dance party attracting many international and domestic tourists. It is New South Wales' second-largest annual event in terms of economic impact, generating an annual income of about A$30 million for the state.
I've had a good amount of sex in my life and I've never had kids. In fact, millions of people are having sex right now with no intention of it producing a child. So what you're saying is that you are anti birth control as well? No condoms? No pill? No rhythm method? Abstinence until ready to produce a child?Shahter wrote:
nope. as no offspring is produced as a result, it's definitely not working as intended. as a said earlier, the reproductive function also has psychological, behavioral and social aspects, which are broken for homosexuals. and because those aspects can potentially be influenced by social means - propaganda - that is not desirable if the society doesn't need more gays produced. and, you know, we don't.Adams_BJ wrote:
The desire to reproduce is reflected with a boner and a need to bust a but. That is it. It doesn't go further. Gays like to bust a but with other gays. Working as intended
now, it has to be said that most gays are totally normal and capable of being productive members of society in all respects which don't involve reproduction, that's why in everything that doesn't touch that i'm totally for extending all the privileges and state support everybody else is entitled to to homosexuals. that's definitely something we'll have to work on in russia, but, as i said before, we will find a way to do that without help from idiots dressed in ballet tutu's parading in from of our children.
No you're just saying that if someone doesn't fulfill an "instinctual imperative" for the sake of their species that they're damaged goods. It's embarrassing. For you. When you consider how many people who have made positive contributions to human society have lived and died without ever having had a child?Extra Medium wrote:
What a shit idiot statement. I'm not talking about those instincts. I'm talking about ONE instinct. An instinct that is mutually shared by every animal in the animal kingdom. Do I need to remind you what it is or are you going to ask me if humans are broken because we don't lick our own assholes to keep them clean and free of worms?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Eating one's young is also an instinct of some species. Does that mean the human race is broken if we don't do it?
Lifelong bachelors: mentally disabled.
Why are you ok with women giving oral or receiving anal sex but if a man does it to another man it's immoral? Those acts, when performed with a women do not end with children. They are strictly for pleasure, just like 99.9% of 'normal' sex.Extra Medium wrote:
The whole argument for or against homosexuality is one that people can construe one of many ways in order to fit their specific belief and/or preference. It's much like a religious debate where it the entire argument is based on conjecture, opinion, faith, and preference. Trying to argue for your case one way or the other definitively or decisively is impossible, regardless.
That being said, what is really in question is where do we, collectively as a local, state, or world community, draw the line? One side of the line being acceptable and the other non acceptable. Everyone can agree that a line must be drawn, defining what we as a society find to be lawful, decent, and normal, and the other being what we find criminal, shameful and abnormal. This must be done on a local level, at the very most a state level. The reason I say state level is because to expect a country like Saudi Arabia to enact even the most minute amount of gay rights is unreasonable at best, whereas in a country like Canada it would seem a given.
Wondering why Russia stands where they do? Look at their culture and their history and it makes sense and for us to think that they should do it any differently than they are, simply because we are able to do it so easily here, is short sighted and simple minded at best. A states laws should follow the communities values as a guideline as this at the most basic level is what makes the laws hold weight, seem reasonable, make sense and makes them be worth upholding. If the Russian people's values on a majority level do not support the gay rights movement, then you really shouldn't act surprised when the police beat the shit out of some gay people that are protesting in the street. In a place like California where support for the gay community is high and the laws aren't lining up properly, then yes, you should be upset.
Therein lies my problem with the whole gay rights movement. Just because there is one gay guy somewhere they want all the laws changed to accommodate what can largely be debated as a choice of lifestyle. When they don't get what they want they throw a fucking fit. They act surprised when people backlash at them, their laws get denied, and they don't get treated like normal people. They are the modern day, real life, living example of someone trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. For example, you can have 1,000 gay people march on Oklahoma City, have all the scientific evidence you want showing it's natural and benefits society, you could even have studies that show gay sex reduces air pollution, AND still you would never see a popular support for gay marriage here. The majority of the local population does not support it, you aren't going to get them to change their minds by dressing like a fairy in ass-less chaps and walking up and down the street, you aren't going to get any more friends by yelling at the state building, the....people....don't.....want.....it.....here. It makes about as much sense as pro-gun people trying to pass laws where anyone can buy RPG's at Wal-Mart by dressing up like AR-15's and protesting in front of Sandy Hook.
Square peg, round hole.
intentions - that is, conscious decisions - is one thing, biological predisposition and derived psychological and behavioral specifics - another. the main argument for homosexuality has always been "it happens in nature, they were born that way, it's not a choice", right? so, yeah, if they were actually born that way then they are impaired people. if they are not then they are perverts. in either case, they should not be allowed to publicly promote their homosexuality.Jay wrote:
I've had a good amount of sex in my life and I've never had kids. In fact, millions of people are having sex right now with no intention of it producing a child.
none of these have anything to do with what i'm trying to get across, but, just in case you are really interested, my answer is "no" to all.So what you're saying is that you are anti birth control as well? No condoms? No pill? No rhythm method? Abstinence until ready to produce a child?
no.DrunkFace wrote:
Does this upset you Shahter.
If breeding was truly the zenith of human accomplishment then we might as well still be huddled in caves with scraps of food scavenged from other animals. The perversion argument is likewise arbitrary. I can understand not wanting to see public acts of homosexuality done merely for the thrill of trolling. But I'm not against them trying to raise awareness about the fact that yes, they do exist and no, they're not going to steal the children for a gay utopia. If I was a part of a group frequently targeted for unprovoked assaults and murders, I would also have a vested interest in remedying that unwanted cultural situation.Shahter wrote:
intentions - that is, conscious decisions - is one thing, biological predisposition and derived psychological and behavioral specifics - another. the main argument for homosexuality has always been "it happens in nature, they were born that way, it's not a choice", right? so, yeah, if they were actually born that way then they are impaired people. if they are not then they are perverts. in either case, they should not be allowed to publicly promote their homosexuality.
Le Sigh.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
No you're just saying that if someone doesn't fulfill an "instinctual imperative" for the sake of their species that they're damaged goods. It's embarrassing. For you. When you consider how many people who have made positive contributions to human society have lived and died without ever having had a child?Extra Medium wrote:
What a shit idiot statement. I'm not talking about those instincts. I'm talking about ONE instinct. An instinct that is mutually shared by every animal in the animal kingdom. Do I need to remind you what it is or are you going to ask me if humans are broken because we don't lick our own assholes to keep them clean and free of worms?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Eating one's young is also an instinct of some species. Does that mean the human race is broken if we don't do it?
Lifelong bachelors: mentally disabled.
If you want to be a bigot, at least invent a good argument for it.
What..............How the FUCK did you get that question out of what I wrote?Jay wrote:
Why are you ok with women giving oral or receiving anal sex but if a man does it to another man it's immoral? Those acts, when performed with a women do not end with children. They are strictly for pleasure, just like 99.9% of 'normal' sex.