BF2S Forums Hypothetical question regarding homosexuality and abortion.

I believe that natural selection would have done something about genetically gay people by now because they cant directly reproduce and the population hasnt been overcrowded until a couple hundred years ago.

Because God created them that way. They hump anything, including females.

Last edited by JaMDuDe (2006-06-29 09:36:08)

I was talking to people who believe evolution. Becuase if we evolved there shouldnt be genetically gay people. I believe that we were created.

OK well with evolution we are all animals, we might have sex for enjoyment and like other animals our mind is geared towards enjoyment everyone's view of enjoyment is different. Some people like beer while others hate it.

Now with creatism, God did give us free will. But in the words of the bible it's a sin so Gays are sinners and therefore wrong.

No ken, thats humans abusing the free will God gave us.

Its not a sin to feel gay, its a sin to act on it.

JaMDuDe wrote:

No ken, thats humans abusing the free will God gave us.

Its not a sin to feel gay, its a sin to act on it.

Why is it a sin to act on it?  How is that abusing the free will "God gave us"?  So, according to the bible, you cannot covet your neighbor's wife, but you can covet your neighbor's husband, just as long as you don't act on it?  I am done talking to you about this.  Your logic is astounding to me, basically because there is none, just regurgitated scripture and out of date Christian thought.  You try to use evolution (which apparently you don't realize is a fact) against homosexuality, then you try to use religious thought, but neither is working.  The only thing I can do right now is forget about this thread until I am able to converse with you without getting angry.  Peace out!

JaMDuDe wrote:

I was talking to people who believe evolution. Becuase if we evolved there shouldnt be genetically gay people. I believe that we were created.

Not true, this ignores many terminal illneses or illnesses that develop which otherwise prevent procreation.  I know of at least two men who have ex-wives and children, but who are gay.  Many people fight the feeling due to perceived pressure from society.  Again, this just addresses one natural way in which a gene could be spread.  I re-iterate recessive genes and mutation as prevalent phenominon.  This is to say nothing of technological ways in which the entire natural act of procreation is bypassed.  Bottom line, there is no way to logically link evolution to a lack of gays.

Havazn wrote:

I really dont want to digress on the topic, but if God really wanted us to act according to His laws, she shouldn't have given us free will. What is the point of free will if you get punished for using it? Sounds a lot like blackmail to me. One giant sadistic test. Anyone seen the movie Saw?

That destroys the whole concept of morality.  Good can't exist without evil, because they are relative terms.  Without another position to compare it to, good and evil mean nothing.  Same with morality.  If we were not capable for whatever reason of transgressing (in any fashion, not merely this situation) then there would be no concept of morality and we would be robots.  Having the ability to think for ourselves is what elevates over mere instinct

Last edited by puckmercury (2006-06-29 10:08:47)

Ken you dont understand the bible AT ALL. You take my words and interpret them in a way you want and think thats what the bible says. You took about half of a rule, interpreted in a way you thought it should go and twisted it a little. Maybe thats why its not very logical. The bible says not to covet any of your neighbors stuff(including the gay husband of your neighbors wife).

Puck im not saying that the gay gene couldnt somehow get passed down. Its that it most likely couldnt have. If you think natural selection and mutations can create a consciousness then it should be able to stop men from being attracted to eachother in a struggling population over millions of years.

Last edited by JaMDuDe (2006-06-29 11:57:08)

JaMDuDe wrote:

If you think natural selection and mutations can create a consciousness then it should be able to stop men from being attracted to eachother in a struggling population over millions of years.

I believe the opposite.  I believe that the "gene" or disposition, or whatever you call it is essential to the populous as a form of inherent population control

Havazn:

And if there is no morality to speak of, what is the point?  You aren't talking about changing the concept of morality, you are talking about abolishing it.  Without that element, what's the motivation to do anything, or not to do it?

JaMDuDe wrote:

Ken you dont understand the bible AT ALL. You take my words and interpret them in a way you want and think thats what the bible says. You took about half of a rule, interpreted in a way you thought it should go and twisted it a little. Maybe thats why its not very logical. The bible says not to covet any of your neighbors stuff(including the gay husband of your neighbors wife).

Puck im not saying that the gay gene couldnt somehow get passed down. Its that it most likely couldnt have. If you think natural selection and mutations can create a consciousness then it should be able to stop men from being attracted to each other in a struggling population over millions of years.

LOL, you crack me UP!

Whisper
"Shhh . . . the gays want to marry each other - oh no! But they can't reproduce?"

Clearly it is a matter of gene-expression and the influence of hormones upon a fetus’ developing gonads and later hormonal influence upon the adolescent child; as the gene-expression & hormone-effects can also effect areas of the brain & brain development (ones that influence sexual attraction). Because a fetus is somewhat neutral (not male) it is changed during its development into maleness or female-ness (it’s what happens during fetal development that determines early sexual differentiation - it is not written in stone. It’s a matter of statistical averages or statistical majority that most people are basically comfortable in the traditional concept of being male [maleness] or being female [female-ness] ). The development cycle does not always produce the clear absolutes (male or female) that you’re mistakenly thinking of.  Shit JimmyDude, yous can even gets both at once! (Hermaphradite).

Consider this as well:
A human population could easily be sustained from generation to generation if 90% of the males were discarded. The remaining 10% could easily produce enough semen & thus just as healthy offspring, with NO impact on the next generation. Women having children is what sustains a population; not male populations. You could make the majority of the male population: gay, sterile, won’t have kids, discard millions of them in some stupid religious conflict (war). . . and the remaining males would be more than enough to sustain the ensuing generations.

Nature favors the female - they are necessary. Male gayness has no IMPACT whatsoever on the ability of a human population to increase in size from generation to generation. Gayness has NO impact on evolution period.

puckmercury wrote:

Havazn:

And if there is no morality to speak of, what is the point?  You aren't talking about changing the concept of morality, you are talking about abolishing it.  Without that element, what's the motivation to do anything, or not to do it?

Well thats the problem now because, in the soceiety we live in, has based all its moral rules and laws on religious ones. Now I'm not saying that they are all wrong, but that they may need to be updated. If we are given the ability to think for ourselves, why cannot we then choose what is right and wrong? Why must it be dictated to us by a book that is based on a paranormal being?

Thinking logically about the morales we live by is all I ask; using our concious thought that, supposedly, God gave us. Let's look at homosexuality through reason. What's bad about it and whats good? Dont just hate and reject it simply because you are told to. If you are blindly following someone's orders, is that really freewill?

Havazn wrote:

If you are blindly following someone's orders, is that really freewill?

GOD no ... pun intended.  I totally agree with and support thinking for yourself.  It has been my experience that the most uber Christian and "moral" individuals are usually the most mindless and hypocritical.  Even accepting that the basis for most modern day laws were spoon fed interpretations of King Solomon or other excerpts from the bible, we CHOSE to accept those.  And ultimately, the bible was in fact written by man, no matter how anyone tries to word it.  I say this as a Christian, mind you, just not a mindless one who subscribes to some prewritten dogma.

Now, to apply some of these notions of thinking for one's self.  Taking a step back from these "sacred" documents to apply some secular thinking, they truly are based on common sense and general clear thinking with a few religiously specific examples.  Take the 10 commandments.  Don't kill anyone, don't screw your neighbor's wife, don't take his stuff ... pretty common sense things here.  Nevermind the fact that they are supposedly handed down by God to Moses ... these are a solid moral ground regardless of their genesis.

Havazn wrote:

If you are blindly following someone's orders, is that really freewill?

Absolutely not, which is why I have such a problem with the more religious individuals I come accross.  They have a common thread of accepting what they are told ... by anyone purported by their parents to be reputable.  It's a self perpetuating system of ignorance.  No one thinks for themselves except for a select few.  This select few then dictates what is the "correct" interpretation of these documents and how they apply to modern day.  The only extension of these persons are other individuals named by them.  Seriously.

=TFF=Omen_NataS wrote:

I'm sorry but i do not see how people can turn Gay Look at this Pic and tell me it doesn't disturb you

http://img332.imageshack.us/img332/1032/00315zv.jpg

I think the point is that you don't "turn" gay, you ARE gay.