Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers
This thread has fallen into ruin. OP you must activate the self destruct sequence.

T-Minus 10....9...8... Time to bail the heck out. Not enough parachutes and escape pods for everyone. I am out PPPPPFFFSSSSHHHHHHHTTTTTttttttt......

Yeah It's pretty bad , I just got out of work to check in to see what I missed & People are talking about eating pork & punching people in the face

I don't "object" to homosexual behavior per se, but I also don't approve of it being promoted as just as normal as being "black and ... white or asian or latino". It is not.

First off, let me state that I am not a member of any organized religion. I do not have a rebel flag in my pickup truck (or even a pickup truck for that matter) and I do have several queer friends and relatives that I cherish deeply. That being said, one cannot deny the fact that being gay is an aberration of the natural order. The reason being is that the raison d'être of every living thing - from the lowest nematode to the largest whale follows 3 inviolable drives: 1. to acquire energy 2. to convert energy 3. to reproduce. That's it - the essence of living. Show me a species that doesn't adhere to one of these 3 directives and I'll show you a species with a very limited shelf-life. That's a simple biological fact. In summation, the first two motives are merely enablers for the final and ultimate motivator; to make more of its own kind.

Now you can layer over whatever kind of enlightened thinking you want over that, but the truth is that if a species does not reproduce then it does not survive. Therefore the urge to reproduce must be a core component to a 'normal' representative of any species. To NOT reproduce is against the order of nature. Being gay goes against that order.

However, that does not mean to say that gays should be oppressed or vilified any more than we should abuse the blind or the lame (also non-functional aberrations of our species). A rabbit born blind is doomed to its fate - a human born blind may be shown compassion and survive despite the dictates of a harsh nature because of our collective human compassion. So it should be with gays. Conversely, in our enlightened minds, it does not mean that we should mistakenly celebrate being gay any more than we would tell our children "Gee, it sure is GREAT to be blind!". That is not the truth and we all know it: no one wants to be blind because it is not normal and it is not positive for the species. That goes for being queer as well.

We need to find a middle ground here: we must accept gays and allow them the full function and support that we can provide from our privileged positions as thinking beings. At the same time, we cannot deny our position as animals - living representatives of a chain of natural reproduction - and pretend that gays are just as "normal" as everybody else.

Robin Godfellow I will attempt to explain why I have no problem with homosexuality and why I do have a problem with people having sex with animals.

It is a matter of consent. I object to people forcing themselves upon an innocent who cannot protect itself against such an invasion.

Anything between consenting adults is ok with me - and no, I don't desire to witness it. Voyeurism has never been my thing and nor has occupying my mind with thoughts of what other people may or may not be up to sexually.

Passenger Are heterosexuals who choose not to reproduce abnormal?



[edit on 13-7-2009 by berenike]

Hopefully ATS will take it upon themselves and ban this subject much like the illegal drugs issue, both the pro and con threads. At least move it to somewhere where this crap doesn't end up on the front page every other week because some dude is angry about a previous thread which in turn creates a pro thread which in turn creates a con thread. I miss the days when home page was actually news and interesting information and not just whining with all of the people who agreed with the OPs whining flagging it.

Please see my new thread titled, "Why homosexuality discussion has no place on ATS."...jk

[edit on 13-7-2009 by Staringintoinfinity]

Sigh...the point is these conversations don't belong on the home page, there's 3 up there right now all dealing with this subject. There's no debate just flaming from one side or the other. They go on until someone feels they need to start a new thread and the whole thing continues on the new thread. I'm all for reasonable debate when there's one to be had....

[edit on 13-7-2009 by Staringintoinfinity]

I know that people are physically born homosexual as its been proven many times but still. I for one do not like to see it. Secondly, I don't want my future children growing up in a world where they think being homosexual is a viable option. If they later choose it in life, against all challenges, that's fine.

Originally posted by Staringintoinfinity
Sigh... I'm all for reasonable debate when there's one to be had....

HA! If you could show me one, I'd be glad to participate. Especially when you are talking about the verboten three...

I do agree with your general sentiment but I cannot agree with your call for suppressing any thought. ATS needs to remain a bastion for allowing free speech. As long as said speech is not espousing dangerous or illegal activities, I say it should be allowed.

As always, if you don't like a post - don't participate! Now, enough of the digression and back to the OP's subject matter.

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
My point is who cares if to homos want to sword fight in there own bedrooms? I for one do not wish to watch nor do I care what they do in there own room...So if this is true lets usher it in bring on the gay marriage

It doesn't just have to do with the religious angle. Marriage is a socially acceptable, legally recognized entity. It benefits society and our culture and provides security for the future of the species. In our society, marriage is between a man and a woman. This concept has been tried and tested for millennia. Trying to change the parameters midstream is unreasonable.

If someone tried to sell you a wooden box with wheels taped to the side and a fan on the back, would you accept that as a "car"? Would you argue that you have the right to try to drive it down the street?

You cannot re-define what already is. A rose is a rose and a marriage is a man and a woman.

... Some of the bashers here are so small minded and primitve I'm am in awe at the meer fact that they can use a computer.

.... I hope ATS never advertises for Geico, ... ya know, " so easy a caveman can do it" ....

... some of you would fly into a homicidal rage.