|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
 Posted - 02/03/2006 : 09:34:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
Bill, you forget one little fact. Not all homosexuals are unable to produce viable offspring with partners of the opposite gender. The same is true for humans and animals. Many men and women who are homosexual do produce living, fertile, healthy offspring with partners of the opposite sex, whether by reproductive drive to have offspring (contrary to their own taste) while engaging in their activities with others of the same gender. Only because a stallion likes to hump another stallion and even prefers to do so (this has been observed both in the wild and in captivity) doesn't mean he won't hump a mare when she's breedable. Mares often hump each other, as well, and will shun a male from their presence if they aren't breedable.
Face it, Bill. No matter how much you try, your opinion won't change reality.
Edited to add;
Place 50 heterosexual males in an island and you'll get... what?
The same is true for humans and animals.
(bill) What is the difference between humans and animals? I thought humans were animals?
Many men and women who are homosexual do produce living, fertile, healthy offspring with partners of the opposite sex, whether by reproductive drive to have offspring (contrary to their own taste) while engaging in their activities with others of the same gender.
(bill) Just what I said. Homo sex equal death of society. Hetro sex equal the explosion of society.
Only because a stallion likes to hump another stallion and even prefers to do so (this has been observed both in the wild and in captivity) doesn't mean he won't hump a mare when she's breedable.
(bill) He will also try to hump a telephone pole and it has been observed in "nature". It does not make horse/telephone pole sex natural.
Mares often hump each other, as well, and will shun a male from their presence if they aren't breedable.
(bill) Does not make it natural.
Face it, Bill. No matter how much you try, your opinion won't change reality.
(bill) Who's reality? Yours?
Excuse me. I was typing fast and forgot to add "animals from other species". After all, we're all animals, not special, not above, not below the rest. However, I have to ask - elderly people having sex is the death of society? Infertile couples having sex is the death of society? Then how homosexual sex is the death of society? They'll breed anyway, given an equal portion of members of the opposite sex to breed with. The drive to breed is unrelated to the drive to 'mount' whatever crosses its path. The drive to masturbate is different from the drive to breed.
I'd say heterosexual sex is totally irrelevant to society when no offspring is produced. Same works for homosexual sex - it's just irrelevant if they're engaging in it, as long as there's people breeding, society will go on, regardless of your opinion (or mine, or anyone's, gay or not), thankfully.
Edited to add;
Bill, please explain to me how wearing clothes is natural? It isn't and it hasn't destroyed society as of yet. Or using computers. That certainly is unnatural. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
| Edited by - Siberia on 02/03/2006 09:49:27 |
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 09:51:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
Edited to add;
Place 50 heterosexual males in an island and you'll get... what?
Let's see...
10 players and a goalie per team, one head-referee with two line-assistants in two simultaneous matches makes a four team cup-tournament of soccer.
 |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 09:57:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
Neither does hetrosexual sex between sterile subjects. Yet you refuse to call this unnatural.
(bill) AGAIN, if a tool does not work because of age, or it had a defect, this does not mean the tool is unnatural. If you try to use a hammer to pound a nail and the handle breaks this does not mean it is unnatural to use a hammer to drive a nail. Come on, this is not that difficult.
It is unnatural to use the broken hammer to drive a nail, when your neighbour has a perfect one next door...  |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 11:53:16 [Permalink]
|
Dr Mabuse menationed:quote:
Let's see...
10 players and a goalie per team, one head-referee with two line-assistants in two simultaneous matches makes a four team cup-tournament of soccer.
That was the correct answer for 100 random Swedes. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 12:09:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Scott...
Your a homo are you not? That would be my guess if I had to.
Sounds like you might be making some sort of proposition there, eh Bill? Just can't get your mind off that man/boy sex stuff, can you? 
Oh, and just to put your tiny little mind at ease, in case you maybe had something kinky in mind, no I'm not homosexual, but thanks for offering. I also don't judge groups of people about whom I know nothing, based simply on the organizations with which they choose to associate, like you do. I also don't have an unnatural obsession with man/boy sex, like you seem to have. You've peeled back the cover and poured out a couple of your own problems here Bill, and your meager attempt to zing base insults won't put them back in the can.
I expect I'm not the only one here who finds it interesting that you have some mouthy, thoughtless, troll-like comment for nearly every single posting in this thread, with one exception being where I pointed out some relevant material in one of those popular self-help books. But maybe you haven't read it. I know where you can get a free copy if you don't already have one, Bill.
Sounds like you might be making some sort of proposition there, eh Bill?
(bill) You wish.
Just can't get your mind off that man/boy sex stuff, can you?
(bill) Well, it was the main topic of the conversation for most of this post. The ACLU and nambla so of coarse it would be in my posts. I suppose you would prefer I post on man/animal sex even though that is not the topic?
Oh, and just to put your tiny little mind at ease, in case you maybe had something kinky in mind, no I'm not homosexual, but thanks for offering.
(bill) Your involved in case of wishful thinking. I never offered you anything. Maybe it is you, with your obsession that I am hitting on you, who needs to reevaluate his orientation
I also don't judge groups of people about whom I know nothing, based simply on the organizations with which they choose to associate, like you do.
(bill) Sure you do, and why would you not? If their is a group of adults who sponsor a website, in secret, that is in favor of decriminalizing sex between adults/children then I have no problem making a judgement to condemn this. If you do then that is your problem.
Just as you judge whole groups of people all day long on SFN that do not conform to your worldview.
I also don't have an unnatural obsession with man/boy sex, like you seem to have.
(bill) You mean yours is natural? Hmm, interesting.
You've peeled back the cover and poured out a couple of your own problems here Bill,
(bill) Whatever gee. Your phycic psycho evaluation was way off. Keep practicing Chloe.
and your meager attempt to zing base insults won't put them back in the can.
(bill) I thought that was all part of the fun of this site? Zinging insults at anyone who won't tow the party line. That was the impression I got from reading the SFN forum.
I expect I'm not the only one here who finds it interesting that you have some mouthy, thoughtless, troll-like comment for nearly every single posting in this thread,
(bill) Well after reading your post I would say your rather mouthy yourself.
with one exception being where I pointed out some relevant material in one of those popular self-help books. But maybe you haven't read it. I know where you can get a free copy if you don't already have one, Bill.
(bill) Why should I read it? It obviously did not help you.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 12:21:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
Bill, you forget one little fact. Not all homosexuals are unable to produce viable offspring with partners of the opposite gender. The same is true for humans and animals. Many men and women who are homosexual do produce living, fertile, healthy offspring with partners of the opposite sex, whether by reproductive drive to have offspring (contrary to their own taste) while engaging in their activities with others of the same gender. Only because a stallion likes to hump another stallion and even prefers to do so (this has been observed both in the wild and in captivity) doesn't mean he won't hump a mare when she's breedable. Mares often hump each other, as well, and will shun a male from their presence if they aren't breedable.
Face it, Bill. No matter how much you try, your opinion won't change reality.
Edited to add;
Place 50 heterosexual males in an island and you'll get... what?
The same is true for humans and animals.
(bill) What is the difference between humans and animals? I thought humans were animals?
Many men and women who are homosexual do produce living, fertile, healthy offspring with partners of the opposite sex, whether by reproductive drive to have offspring (contrary to their own taste) while engaging in their activities with others of the same gender.
(bill) Just what I said. Homo sex equal death of society. Hetro sex equal the explosion of society.
Only because a stallion likes to hump another stallion and even prefers to do so (this has been observed both in the wild and in captivity) doesn't mean he won't hump a mare when she's breedable.
(bill) He will also try to hump a telephone pole and it has been observed in "nature". It does not make horse/telephone pole sex natural.
Mares often hump each other, as well, and will shun a male from their presence if they aren't breedable.
(bill) Does not make it natural.
Face it, Bill. No matter how much you try, your opinion won't change reality.
(bill) Who's reality? Yours?
Excuse me. I was typing fast and forgot to add "animals from other species". After all, we're all animals, not special, not above, not below the rest. However, I have to ask - elderly people having sex is the death of society? Infertile couples having sex is the death of society? Then how homosexual sex is the death of society? They'll breed anyway, given an equal portion of members of the opposite sex to breed with. The drive to breed is unrelated to the drive to 'mount' whatever crosses its path. The drive to masturbate is different from the drive to breed.
I'd say heterosexual sex is totally irrelevant to society when no offspring is produced. Same works for homosexual sex - it's just irrelevant if they're engaging in it, as long as there's people breeding, society will go on, regardless of your opinion (or mine, or anyone's, gay or not), thankfully.
Edited to add;
Bill, please explain to me how wearing clothes is natural? It isn't and it hasn't destroyed society as of yet. Or using computers. That certainly is unnatural.
Excuse me. I was typing fast and forgot to add "animals from other species". After all, we're all animals, not special, not above, not below the rest.
(bill) So if man is nothing more then an animal then anything man does must be considered natural since the definition for natural is anything accruing in nature.
However, I have to ask - elderly people having sex is the death of society?
(bill) It's not
Infertile couples having sex is the death of society?
(bill) Nope.
Then how homosexual sex is the death of society?
(bill) I said if the homos were on a Island with their own kind it would be the death of their society. If the same Island was filled with hetros the population will fluorite.
They'll breed anyway, given an equal portion of members of the opposite sex to breed with.
(bill) This is hetro sex not homo.
The drive to breed is unrelated to the drive to 'mount' whatever crosses its path. The drive to masturbate is different from the drive to breed.
(bill) You sound very knowledgeable in this area.
I'd say heterosexual sex is totally irrelevant to society when no offspring is produced. Same works for homosexual sex - it's just irrelevant if they're engaging in it, as long as there's people breeding, society will go on,
(bill) Just what I have been saying. Homo sex only and society dies. Add hetro sex (breeding) and society moves on. Homo sex by itself kills the society. Hetro sex by itself grows the society. Homo sex was not the intent when natural selection or the creator, take you pick, designed the human body. The male penis was designed for the female vagina and the vagina was designed to accept the penis. The penis being forced in the rectum is simply a distortion of the original intent of the designer, whom ever that may be.
Edited to add;
Bill, please explain to me how wearing clothes is natural? It isn't and it hasn't destroyed society as of yet. Or using computers. That certainly is unnatural.
(bill) If man is an animal, and anything that happens in nature is natural, according to the SFN forum, then man wearing cloths is natural .
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 12:42:03 [Permalink]
|
RE this homosexual/child molester issue, I wouldn't have any reason to believe homosexuals are more likely to do such things, but I think those who become priests might be (admittedly, this is pure speculation.) First, an inordinate number of the (male) homosexuals I've met were screwed-up people... they tended to be heavy boozers and annoying loudmouths, and their personalities reminded me of the personalities of women with psychological problems. Yet I think a vast majority of the homosexuals are most likely better-adjusted and just going about their jobs and lives, and don't publicly blow-off at the mouth about their sexual lives and such, so I wouldn't know what goes on in their personal lives or bedrooms (which is good because I don't care, and I don't want to know.) In other words, the only reason I knew the ones I encountered were homosexuals was that they were publicly explicit about it because they were neurotics and drunken asses, and it would be a mistake to make assumptions about most homosexuals based upon what I saw in those guys, or likewise the exhibitionist screwballs in gay pride parades shown on the news throwing around condoms while dressed like x-rated porn freaks. I think noticing that kind of character (and generalizing) is what probably leads a lot of other heterosexual people to erroneously believe homosexuals tend to be perverts or psychologically twisted.
Yet regarding priests, there are aspects of clergy jobs that have probably always made them appealing to some of "unconventional" sexual orientations- most commonly meaning homosexuals- and it seems to me perverts and malicious nuts might be over-represented among homosexuals who take up the clergy as opposed to heterosexuals who do, since their sexual orientation (as opposed to their Faith, whether it's delusional or not) will more often be their primary motivation for taking that path. And, to do so for that reason suggests to me they're probably less well-adjusted than homosexuals who pursue traditional jobs of their choosing. I think that's why we seem to (and probably do) have so many perverts among priests.
I'm sure there are ethical homosexuals who are priests, and they probably hate the scumbags in their ranks who molest kids even more than the public at large does, because the kind of moral corruption, sinister criminality, and ethical bankruptcy displayed by those cruds hurts them worse as a group than it does anyone else except the victims. As such, I think the Vatican making an official effort now to flush out and jettison the homosexuals might be a good idea- even though it's unfair to some- because there are likely a lot more of the dangerous wackos among them, and figuring out which ones are sociopaths could be pretty tough considering that they've managed to circumvent the filters designed to prevent such deviants from infiltrating the organization to begin with... to get that far, they had to be consummate actors. In my perspective, that's more a matter of protecting the public than applauding an organization I think is otherwise pretty shady in a historical sense, and in other ways. From what I've seen of them, their leaders aren't any different in mindset than any other randomly selected group of businessmen, and some probably couldn't give a damn less, except that they can't afford any more bad press. Might be more of that type in the higher echelons, in fact, since the Catholic Church generally seems to be a pretty racket-infested outfit these days (assuming it was even any different.) |
Ron White |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 12:44:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
Bill, you forget one little fact. Not all homosexuals are unable to produce viable offspring with partners of the opposite gender. The same is true for humans and animals. Many men and women who are homosexual do produce living, fertile, healthy offspring with partners of the opposite sex, whether by reproductive drive to have offspring (contrary to their own taste) while engaging in their activities with others of the same gender. Only because a stallion likes to hump another stallion and even prefers to do so (this has been observed both in the wild and in captivity) doesn't mean he won't hump a mare when she's breedable. Mares often hump each other, as well, and will shun a male from their presence if they aren't breedable.
Face it, Bill. No matter how much you try, your opinion won't change reality.
Edited to add;
Place 50 heterosexual males in an island and you'll get... what?
The same is true for humans and animals.
(bill) What is the difference between humans and animals? I thought humans were animals?
Many men and women who are homosexual do produce living, fertile, healthy offspring with partners of the opposite sex, whether by reproductive drive to have offspring (contrary to their own taste) while engaging in their activities with others of the same gender.
(bill) Just what I said. Homo sex equal death of society. Hetro sex equal the explosion of society.
Only because a stallion likes to hump another stallion and even prefers to do so (this has been observed both in the wild and in captivity) doesn't mean he won't hump a mare when she's breedable.
(bill) He will also try to hump a telephone pole and it has been observed in "nature". It does not make horse/telephone pole sex natural.
Mares often hump each other, as well, and will shun a male from their presence if they aren't breedable.
(bill) Does not make it natural.
Face it, Bill. No matter how much you try, your opinion won't change reality.
(bill) Who's reality? Yours?
Excuse me. I was typing fast and forgot to add "animals from other species". After all, we're all animals, not special, not above, not below the rest. However, I have to ask - elderly people having sex is the death of society? Infertile couples having sex is the death of society? Then how homosexual sex is the death of society? They'll breed anyway, given an equal portion of members of the opposite sex to breed with. The drive to breed is unrelated to the drive to 'mount' whatever crosses its path. The drive to masturbate is different from the drive to breed.
I'd say heterosexual sex is totally irrelevant to society when no offspring is produced. Same works for homosexual sex - it's just irrelevant if they're engaging in it, as long as there's people breeding, society will go on, regardless of your opinion (or mine, or anyone's, gay or not), thankfully.
Edited to add;
Bill, please explain to me how wearing clothes is natural? It isn't and it hasn't destroyed society as of yet. Or using computers. That certainly is unnatural.
Excuse me. I was typing fast and forgot to add "animals from other species". After all, we're all animals, not special, not above, not below the rest.
(bill) So if man is nothing more then an animal then anything man does must be considered natural since the definition for natural is anything accruing in nature.
However, I have to ask - elderly people having sex is the death of society?
(bill) It's not
Infertile couples having sex is the death of society?
(bill) Nope.
Then how homosexual sex is the death of society?
(bill) I said if the homos were on a Island with their own kind it would be the death of their society. If the same Island was filled with hetros the population will fluorite.
They'll breed anyway, given an equal portion of members of the opposite sex to breed with.
(bill) This is hetro sex not homo.
The drive to breed is unrelated to the drive to 'mount' whatever crosses its path. The drive to masturbate is different from the drive to breed.
(bill) You sound very knowledgeable in this area.
I'd say heterosexual sex is totally irrelevant to society when no offspring is produced. Same works for homosexual sex - it's just irrelevant if they're engaging in it, as long as there's people breeding, society will go on,
(bill) Just what I have been saying. Homo sex only and society dies. Add hetro sex (breeding) and society moves on. Homo sex by itself kills the society. Hetro sex by itself grows the society. Homo sex was not the intent when natural selection or the creator, take you pick, designed the human body. The male penis was designed for the female vagina and the vagina was designed to accept the penis. The penis being forced in the rectum is simply a distortion of the original intent of the designer, whom ever that may be.
Edited to add;
Bill, please explain to me how wearing clothes is natural? It isn't and it hasn't destroyed society as of yet. Or using computers. That certainly is unnatural.
(bill) If man is an animal, and anything that happens in nature is natural, according to the SFN forum, then man wearing cloths is natural .
I am from the principle that everything that humans do is natural; I have no silly preconceived notions of things that should or shouldn't be. Murder may be wrong, a terrible thing that must be punished, but it's not unnatural. Nor is abortion or homosexual sex unnatural.
Whatever you think is irrelevant to me. I'm sure what I think is quite irrelevant to you, as well. Thankfully, neither of us can change reality and obviously, my opinion or yours about whether or not homosexual sex is natural or unnatural is irrelevant to the fact that it happens, both in the wild and our society. Thankfully, because it happens in the wild, we may argue that people are not immoral; they're just animals following their drives. Just as heterosexual people.
Even artificial things, such as clothes and computers. Homosexual lovin' is just what it is; in fact, there are studies that show homosexuality among apes serve to strengthen societal bonds. The same works for dolphins. Not quite the end of society...
And I could argue that heterosexual sex only could lead to overpopulation and the extermination not only of the same society in the island, but also the other species that share the habitat with it. After all, it's happened in China, hasn't it?
And though the man's penis might have been made to fit the woman's vagina (and how you got to this conclusion that it can't go anywhere else is beyond me), it doesn't stop anal sex from causing humans to breed, so it doesn't really matter, in the end, where it goes or won't go. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 12:50:30 [Permalink]
|
| Could we please consider closing this thread, to force a move to the correct thread? (Unless Beskeptigal thinks the original topic is still salvagable here, which I doubt.) |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 13:40:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
Bill, you forget one little fact. Not all homosexuals are unable to produce viable offspring with partners of the opposite gender. The same is true for humans and animals. Many men and women who are homosexual do produce living, fertile, healthy offspring with partners of the opposite sex, whether by reproductive drive to have offspring (contrary to their own taste) while engaging in their activities with others of the same gender. Only because a stallion likes to hump another stallion and even prefers to do so (this has been observed both in the wild and in captivity) doesn't mean he won't hump a mare when she's breedable. Mares often hump each other, as well, and will shun a male from their presence if they aren't breedable.
Face it, Bill. No matter how much you try, your opinion won't change reality.
Edited to add;
Place 50 heterosexual males in an island and you'll get... what?
The same is true for humans and animals.
(bill) What is the difference between humans and animals? I thought humans were animals?
Many men and women who are homosexual do produce living, fertile, healthy offspring with partners of the opposite sex, whether by reproductive drive to have offspring (contrary to their own taste) while engaging in their activities with others of the same gender.
(bill) Just what I said. Homo sex equal death of society. Hetro sex equal the explosion of society.
Only because a stallion likes to hump another stallion and even prefers to do so (this has been observed both in the wild and in captivity) doesn't mean he won't hump a mare when she's breedable.
(bill) He will also try to hump a telephone pole and it has been observed in "nature". It does not make horse/telephone pole sex natural.
Mares often hump each other, as well, and will shun a male from their presence if they aren't breedable.
(bill) Does not make it natural.
Face it, Bill. No matter how much you try, your opinion won't change reality.
(bill) Who's reality? Yours?
Excuse me. I was typing fast and forgot to add "animals from other species". After all, we're all animals, not special, not above, not below the rest. However, I have to ask - elderly people having sex is the death of society? Infertile couples having sex is the death of society? Then how homosexual sex is the death of society? They'll breed anyway, given an equal portion of members of the opposite sex to breed with. The drive to breed is unrelated to the drive to 'mount' whatever crosses its path. The drive to masturbate is different from the drive to breed.
I'd say heterosexual sex is totally irrelevant to society when no offspring is produced. Same works for homosexual sex - it's just irrelevant if they're engaging in it, as long as there's people breeding, society will go on, regardless of your opinion (or mine, or anyone's, gay or not), thankfully.
Edited to add;
Bill, please explain to me how wearing clothes is natural? It isn't and it hasn't destroyed society as of yet. Or using computers. That certainly is unnatural.
Excuse me. I was typing fast and forgot to add "animals from other species". After all, we're all animals, not special, not above, not below the rest.
(bill) So if man is nothing more then an animal then anything man does must be considered natural since the definition for natural is anything accruing in nature.
However, I have to ask - elderly people having sex is the death of society?
(bill) It's not
Infertile couples having sex is the death of society?
(bill) Nope.
Then how homosexual sex is the death of society?
(bill) I said if the homos were on a Island with their own kind it would be the death of their society. If the same Island was filled with hetros the population will fluorite.
They'll breed anyway, given an equal portion of members of the opposite sex to breed with.
(bill) This is hetro sex not homo.
The drive to breed is unrelated to the drive to 'mount' whatever crosses its path. The drive to masturbate is different from the drive to breed.
(bill) You sound very knowledgeable in this area.
I'd say heterosexual sex is totally irrelevant to society when no offspring is produced. Same works for homosexual sex - it's just irrelevant if they're engaging in it, as long as there's people breeding, society will go on,
(bill) Just what I have been saying. Homo sex only and society dies. Add hetro sex (breeding) and society moves on. Homo sex by itself kills the society. Hetro sex by itself grows the society. Homo sex was not the intent when natural selection or the creator, take you pick, designed the human body. The male penis was designed for the female vagina and the vagina was designed to accept the penis. The penis being forced in the rectum is simply a distortion of the original intent of the designer, whom ever that may be.
Edited to add;
Bill, please explain to me how wearing clothes is natural? It isn't and it hasn't destroyed society as of yet. Or using computers. That certainly is unnatural.
(bill) If man is an animal, and anything that happens in nature is natural, according to the SFN forum, then man wearing cloths is natural .
I am from the principle that everything that humans do is natural; I have no silly preconceived notions of things that should or shouldn't be. Murder may be wrong, a terrible thing that must be punished, but it's not unnatural. Nor is abortion or homosexual sex unnatural.
Whatever you think is irrelevant to me. I'm sure what I think is quite irrelevant to you, as well. Thankfully, neither of us can change reality and obviously, my opinion or yours about whether or not homosexual sex is natural or unnatural is irrelevant to the fact that it happens, both in the wild and our society. Thankfully, because it happens in the wild, we may argue that people are not immoral; they're just animals following their drives. Just as heterosexual people.
Even artificial things, such as clothes and computers. Homosexual lovin' is just what it is; in fact, there are studies that show homosexuality among apes serve to strengthen societal bonds. The same works for dolphins. Not quite the end of society...
And I could argue that heterosexual sex only could lead to overpopulation and the extermination not only of the same society in the island, but also the other species that share the habitat with it. After all, it's happened in China, hasn't it?
And though the man's penis might have been made to fit the woman's vagina (and how you got to this conclusion that it can't go anywhere else is beyond me), it doesn't stop anal sex from causing h |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 13:44:33 [Permalink]
|
Thanks for the nudge Dr. Mabuse and HalfMooner. Moving my comments over to Bill Scott's own thread, Politics >> NAMBLA and the good ol ACLU.
My apologies to beskeptigal, Snake, and anyone else who was trying to have a productive conversation here before it was so rudely interrupted. 
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 13:59:19 [Permalink]
|
Response moved to ACLU thread.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion already in progress. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
| Edited by - Valiant Dancer on 02/03/2006 14:20:20 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2006 : 14:00:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Could we please consider closing this thread, to force a move to the correct thread? (Unless Beskeptigal thinks the original topic is still salvagable here, which I doubt.)
You guys are sweet. It turned out Snake didn't move his O'Relly arguments here and Bill has several threads that all include the ACLU stuff so now the whole thing is a mess. .
I defer to the forum admin to fix or ignore as they wish. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
