I do not really feel the need to go into the difference between a homosexual/ gay person and a pedophile, as I believe the subject was adequatey
explained that the two are completely separate. I believe to some extent children are more and more commonly sexualized in society , via media and
the fashion industry(shopping for appropriate clothes for girls especially) So the case for their being an agenda to promote pedophilia holds some
There is no gay agenda, unless you are considering the "agenda" a civil rights movement. Pressing on however, so many people make the case against
homosexuality based on religious reasons or the fact that it's not natural .
Religion is simply a set of beliefs and like opinions , there are hundreds of them and personally someone who told me they thought gays were wrong
because the flying spaghetti monster told them so, would have just as much scientific credibility as the next person with their set of holy
instructions. So lets take a look at the fact of nature for a minute.
First there is the biological evidence that many (not all ) are born that way. Being gay used to be considered a mental illness , until this
biological evidence was discovered and the fact that being gay does not fit the model of a psychiatric disease. Those who want to argue" that
criminal or psychological diseases are biologically driven so maybe we should tolerate that behavior", has some serious flaws and is a fallacious
argument to begin with. Combining a socially unpopular practice with criminal behavior that hurts victims is a downward spiral on the road to
Darwinist thinking , and that's extremely ugly water to tread.
Next you have the not natural , theory . What exactly is not natural? Because someone is having sex not to breed? It's a very self defeating
argument. because anyone who has sex with a rubber, or just for fun is creating a crime. Let's take anatomy as another example, specifically female
anatomy. According to evolutionists, it's sole purpose is for fun. Now, I don't know the rules on how graphic I can get here , but do some basic
research on the perpetual myths of female orgasm and anatomy. Unless one is a staunch believer in Freud's crackpot ideas about female orgasm
and the idea about sexual pleasure being natural between a man and women , I would say it could be said that it is natural for 60% of unsatisfied
females to have a VERY natural relationship with a battery operated device. On the other hand, many religions are quite adamant against many forms of
sexual pleasure and therefore many could say that female pleasure is just not what god intended at all.
I honestly don't believe that Ive ever heard one rational argument against homosexuality other then someones personal distaste for it , and in that
case go ahead and have your opinion , but don't make everyone else out to be the bad guy.
edit on 24-12-2010 by paleorchid13 because: (no