Are there any valid arguments against homosexuality at all?

Avatar image for slacker_the_hacker
slacker the hacker

10314

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Jeeeeeeeez

Come oooooooooon

Straight

Gay

Whatever

Its all the same at the end of the day in fact its always amazed me how much people worry about who's having sex with who or who gets to marry who. Its honestly way to much work to put all that energy into being against any kind love.

Love makes people smile and smiles are always good.

Avatar image for sc
SC

18454

Forum Posts

182748

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 25

User Lists: 0

#202 SC  Moderator

No not really. Homosexuality is a term to describe a type of behavior, activity and action, so what does it mean to be for or against it? Perhaps better terms are acceptance of homosexuality, rejection of it homosexuality, or denouncing homosexuality as immoral or unnatural or things along those lines. So about understanding and also about application of ideas as far as discretion involved when applying ideas like ethics, morality and what is objectively true and subjectively true and preferential.

Nature and evolution is more complicated than a single individuals motivation to have offspring, not to get too much into it here, but single individuals don't have some ultimate goal of having offspring. Many of the behavior, actions and activities biological organisms will be motivated to undertake will overlap and be prompted by procreation but thats very different conceptually than being a single driving objective. That would have to be established as a valid process to give weight to any validity opposing homosexuality.

Thats just one example. Alternatively there are lots of subjective reasons to be against homosexuality. An individual doesn't like it. An individual does not wish to partake in it, an individuals of the former reasons also believes their reasons and justifications in the opposition of such activity, actions and actions are objective and universal, an authority of some sort imposes restrictions/prohibits that type of behavior, action or activity and individuals/groups allegiance, loyalty or investment is stronger with that authority. Then again that applies as much to any sort of concept that deals with behavior, activity and action and how people are applied to those processes, so not mutually exclusive to the concept/idea of homosexuality.

If being for homosexuality is the idea that individuals should exclusively practice it for it is objectively superior then it suffers from the same or similar problems. If being for homosexuality is the acceptance of homosexuality then as far as understanding and knowledge - validity as far as its naturalness or ethical nature, then its pretty robust. Its kind of a non issue and basically the same as the much more accepted and dominant idea of heterosexuality just that many individuals and groups in history have had difficulty understanding and knowing the differences between what is objective and what is subjective and applying the term natural and ideas about morality and ethics. Even just the last hundred years of science have demonstrated how simplistic, misinformed, flawed and outdated so many centuries of prior human ideas and theories about human behavior, nature have been and the future won't be so different as far as many of the ideas and attitudes present today either.

Avatar image for redxiii18881990
Redxiii18881990

1574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I always found the argument of they can't reproduce funny. I mean sterile men can't reproduce, same goes for infertile women. So does that mean they are just "as bad" as gay people?

I don't think a good argument exists for being against it. Validity on the other hand is something totally different thing.

Avatar image for OverLordArhas
OverLordArhas

7927

Forum Posts

2722

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

@sc:

Nature and evolution is more complicated than a single individuals motivation to have offspring, not to get too much into it here, but single individuals don't have some ultimate goal of having offspring. Many of the behavior, actions and activities biological organisms will be motivated to undertake will overlap and be prompted by procreation but thats very different conceptually than being a single driving objective. That would have to be established as a valid process to give weight to any validity opposing homosexuality.

Individuality aside, isn't every living thing hard coded to reproduce?

Avatar image for sc
SC

18454

Forum Posts

182748

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 25

User Lists: 0

#205 SC  Moderator

@OverLordArhas: Depends on how you apply the idea living thing and reproduction, but short answer is no.

Avatar image for OverLordArhas
OverLordArhas

7927

Forum Posts

2722

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#206  Edited By OverLordArhas
Avatar image for sc
SC

18454

Forum Posts

182748

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 25

User Lists: 0

#207  Edited By SC  Moderator

@OverLordArhas: Well to give a good example again you would have to give me how you are applying the terms "living thing" and "reproduction" (and "hard wired" as well) such terms are very loaded, it would be much better for you just to google and read about Intragenomic conflict and gene-centered view's of evolution. As a vague and basic example, anything that hasn't reproduced because its priorities have been elsewhere, its own survival and so on.

Avatar image for bruxae
Bruxae

18147

Forum Posts

11098

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Not really, the only argument I can get behind is that anal sex can carry harmful bacteria, but that is easily countered with a condom.

There is a big pro though in the fact that the world is severly overpopulated, gay couples will not procreate, if they adopt they will instead take care of an uncared for child that is already here.. Which sounds like a win/win to me.

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#209  Edited By JakeN7

I came back to see if God Spawn deleted my "swamp trash" comment. He did not. I am elated disappoint.

@sc said:

No not really. Homosexuality is a term to describe a type of behavior, activity and action, so what does it mean to be for or against it? Perhaps better terms are acceptance of homosexuality, rejection of it homosexuality, or denouncing homosexuality as immoral or unnatural or things along those lines. So about understanding and also about application of ideas as far as discretion involved when applying ideas like ethics, morality and what is objectively true and subjectively true and preferential.

Nature and evolution is more complicated than a single individuals motivation to have offspring, not to get too much into it here, but single individuals don't have some ultimate goal of having offspring. Many of the behavior, actions and activities biological organisms will be motivated to undertake will overlap and be prompted by procreation but thats very different conceptually than being a single driving objective. That would have to be established as a valid process to give weight to any validity opposing homosexuality.

Thats just one example. Alternatively there are lots of subjective reasons to be against homosexuality. An individual doesn't like it. An individual does not wish to partake in it, an individuals of the former reasons also believes their reasons and justifications in the opposition of such activity, actions and actions are objective and universal, an authority of some sort imposes restrictions/prohibits that type of behavior, action or activity and individuals/groups allegiance, loyalty or investment is stronger with that authority. Then again that applies as much to any sort of concept that deals with behavior, activity and action and how people are applied to those processes, so not mutually exclusive to the concept/idea of homosexuality.

If being for homosexuality is the idea that individuals should exclusively practice it for it is objectively superior then it suffers from the same or similar problems. If being for homosexuality is the acceptance of homosexuality then as far as understanding and knowledge - validity as far as its naturalness or ethical nature, then its pretty robust. Its kind of a non issue and basically the same as the much more accepted and dominant idea of heterosexuality just that many individuals and groups in history have had difficulty understanding and knowing the differences between what is objective and what is subjective and applying the term natural and ideas about morality and ethics. Even just the last hundred years of science have demonstrated how simplistic, misinformed, flawed and outdated so many centuries of prior human ideas and theories about human behavior, nature have been and the future won't be so different as far as many of the ideas and attitudes present today either.

"A little dry and sciencey for my tastes," however...

No Caption Provided

...that was still brilliant.

Avatar image for mr_clockwork91
Mr_Clockwork91

2625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

No hole is off limits, GIGGITY!

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@saren said:

Depending on how you define a valid argument, sure.

How specific. What a helpful addition to the discussion. Such a great-

ERROR...ERROR. SARCASM OVERLOAD. PLEASE TONE DOWN THE SNARK.

*ahem*...examples?

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

No hole is off limits, GIGGITY!

Must...resist...joke...about...your...mother...

Avatar image for mr_clockwork91
Mr_Clockwork91

2625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

No hole is off limits, GIGGITY!

Must...resist...joke...about...your...mother...

"No hole is off limits" is what your mom said to me, funny...

Avatar image for pikachumonster
pikachumonster

3123

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

lol

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

No hole is off limits, GIGGITY!

Must...resist...joke...about...your...mother...

"No hole is off limits" is what your mom said to me, funny...

Meh. I kind of had the opposite scenario in mind, but same difference.

Avatar image for mr_clockwork91
Mr_Clockwork91

2625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

No hole is off limits, GIGGITY!

Must...resist...joke...about...your...mother...

"No hole is off limits" is what your mom said to me, funny...

Meh. I kind of had the opposite scenario in mind, but same difference.

jakeN7's mom is life, jakeN7's mom is love!

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#218  Edited By JakeN7

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

No hole is off limits, GIGGITY!

Must...resist...joke...about...your...mother...

"No hole is off limits" is what your mom said to me, funny...

Meh. I kind of had the opposite scenario in mind, but same difference.

jakeN7's mom is life, jakeN7's mom is love!

Are you saying my mom is Shrek? O_o

Avatar image for mr_clockwork91
Mr_Clockwork91

2625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

@jaken7 said:

@mr_clockwork91 said:

No hole is off limits, GIGGITY!

Must...resist...joke...about...your...mother...

"No hole is off limits" is what your mom said to me, funny...

Meh. I kind of had the opposite scenario in mind, but same difference.

jakeN7's mom is life, jakeN7's mom is love!

Are you saying my mom is Shrek? O_o

I meant whore but whats the difference? I'm just kidding.

Avatar image for pikachumonster
pikachumonster

3123

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Being gay is complicated.

Avatar image for valdemocnij
Valdemocnij

953

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

It's against God's Law. It's against the natural order of things, also.

Avatar image for comicstooge
ComicStooge

22063

Forum Posts

171

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

#222  Edited By ComicStooge

@valdemocnij said:

@johnnyz256 said:

It's against God's Law. It's against the natural order of things, also.

Tatoos are against God's laws too. As are Shellfish and wearing gold.

Plenty of people do those things.

More than that, men without genitals can't be Christians.

"A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord." - Deuteronomy 23:1

If you get testicular cancer and choose to do anything about it, you're going to hell.

Avatar image for valdemocnij
Valdemocnij

953

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#223  Edited By Valdemocnij

@comicstooge:

I don't like tatoos and i'm not for that !!! :D

Avatar image for comicstooge
ComicStooge

22063

Forum Posts

171

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

#224  Edited By ComicStooge

@valdemocnij said:

@comicstooge:

I don't like tatoos and i'm not for that !!! :D

Have you ever shaved?

If so, you're going to hell: "You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard." - Leviticus 19:27

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@comicstooge: Varys, Grey Worm, The Unsullied, and Theon can't be Christains? What does god have against eunuchs?

Avatar image for comicstooge
ComicStooge

22063

Forum Posts

171

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

@jaken7 said:

@comicstooge: Varys, Grey Worm, The Unsullied, and Theon can't be Christains? What does god have against eunuchs?

He also hates bowl-cuts.

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@jaken7 said:

@comicstooge: Varys, Grey Worm, The Unsullied, and Theon can't be Christains? What does god have against eunuchs?

He also hates bowl-cuts.

No...way. You've got to be making that up. xD What about all those friars and monks with tonsures that were in his service? I thought the tonsure was supposed to like, expose your head to god or whatever.

Avatar image for comicstooge
ComicStooge

22063

Forum Posts

171

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

@jaken7 said:

@comicstooge said:

@jaken7 said:

@comicstooge: Varys, Grey Worm, The Unsullied, and Theon can't be Christains? What does god have against eunuchs?

He also hates bowl-cuts.

No...way. You've got to be making that up. xD What about all those friars and monks with tonsures that were in his service? I thought the tonsure was supposed to like, expose your head to god or whatever.

"You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard." - Leviticus 19:27

Those friars are all going to hell.

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#229  Edited By JakeN7

@jaken7 said:

@comicstooge said:

@jaken7 said:

@comicstooge: Varys, Grey Worm, The Unsullied, and Theon can't be Christains? What does god have against eunuchs?

He also hates bowl-cuts.

No...way. You've got to be making that up. xD What about all those friars and monks with tonsures that were in his service? I thought the tonsure was supposed to like, expose your head to god or whatever.

"You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard." - Leviticus 19:27

Those friars are all going to hell.

No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided

Poor Friar Tuck...at least he'll burn with his buddy, Robin Hood.

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for valdemocnij
Valdemocnij

953

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@comicstooge:

Believe me... there is no man no woman who earn to go to paradise... everyone have a sins !

Avatar image for kyrees
kyrees

13625

Forum Posts

100

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

the only valid argument against homosexuality is reproduction and propagation but in our current world state, those two are not the priority. maybe if earth suffered a global cataclysm that reduced the world's population would these two things be fully considered.

cultural differences is a tricky thing to argue forth because of deep rooted prejudices or custom or societal norm that would pretty much make any argument for homosexuality dead. this also includes religious doctrines.

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@comicstooge:

Believe me... there is no man no woman who earn to go to paradise... everyone have a sins !

So...no one goes to heaven?

Avatar image for comicstooge
ComicStooge

22063

Forum Posts

171

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

@comicstooge:

Believe me... there is no man no woman who earn to go to paradise... everyone have a sins !

Loading Video...

Avatar image for princearagorn1
PrinceAragorn1

31807

Forum Posts

53

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

No such a thing as 'valid argument' in these matters. What's valid for one maybe invalid for others or opposite..

Avatar image for pikahyper
pikahyper

19027

Forum Posts

37057995

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 581

#235  Edited By pikahyper  Moderator

This thread cracks me up :P

Has anyone ever thought that maybe just maybe homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomena brought on by overpopulation? The increasing amount of homosexuals through the years has never been a proportional increase but it does seem to inflate naturally when society/humanity reaches a point of overpopulation and excess (greed/wealth/power) (and it also seems to occur when religion is at it weakest i.e. less control over the masses). While procreation may be hard-wired in us as a natural imperative to further the species it would also make sense that something would be present to insure that said species would not grow to the extent that the environment would no longer be able to sustain it, if you look at animal species they rarely overpopulate naturally, it is only when other factors (new environs, humans, unnatural changes in the food chain/weather) are brought in that causes their overpopulation. As it is humanity is the one species that has been advanced enough to ignore a lot of these natural instincts and the Earth is paying the price, in the future homosexuality could be the thing that keeps us from destroying the planet cause humans sure as hell won't ever allow any man made laws decide how many kids they can have.

Also the view of procreation being a valid argument against homosexuality doesn't hold up against evolution and nature, humanity could never die out just from homosexuality, even if the entire human race was gay we wouldn't give up, even ignoring science and what can be done medically to conceive a child you don't have to like having sex with the opposite sex to procreate, men and women have probably been having sex with the opposite sex even when it repulses them since we lived in caves.

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

This thread cracks me up :P

Has anyone ever thought that maybe just maybe homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomena brought on by overpopulation? The increasing amount of homosexuals through the years has never been a proportional increase but it does seem to inflate naturally when society/humanity reaches a point of overpopulation and excess (greed/wealth/power) (and it also seems to occur when religion is at it weakest i.e. less control over the masses). While procreation may be hard-wired in us as a natural imperative to further the species it would also make sense that something would be present to insure that said species would not grow to the extent that the environment would no longer be able to sustain it, if you look at animal species they rarely overpopulate naturally, it is only when other factors (new environs, humans, unnatural changes in the food chain/weather) are brought in that causes their overpopulation. As it is humanity is the one species that has been advanced enough to ignore a lot of these natural instincts and the Earth is paying the price, in the future homosexuality could be the thing that keeps us from destroying the planet cause humans sure as hell won't ever allow any man made laws decide how many kids they can have.

Also the view of procreation being a valid argument against homosexuality doesn't hold up against evolution and nature, humanity could never die out just from homosexuality, even if the entire human race was gay we wouldn't give up, even ignoring science and what can be done medically to conceive a child you don't have to like having sex with the opposite sex to procreate, men and women have probably been having sex with the opposite sex even when it repulses them since we lived in caves.

Interesting theory. Historical evidence with the Greeks and the Romans adds credence to your hypothesis. I like where you're going with this.

Avatar image for pikahyper
pikahyper

19027

Forum Posts

37057995

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 581

#237 pikahyper  Moderator

@jaken7: Greeks and Romans especially. Nature tends to find a way, in the end, to keep things under control one way or the other, the same argument can be made for some of humanities largest illnesses and even natural disasters that keep humanity and all living organisms in check. Religious people would see this as god's influence but from the non-religious viewpoint everything on this planet is part of one large symbiotic system, everything is connected one way or another and while people tend to ignore it overpopulation is a huge problem for future sustainability.

Avatar image for bumpyboo
BumpyBoo

14977

Forum Posts

270338

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 20

No, I can't really think of a single valid reason to tell other people what to do with their own heart/private parts, it's their business. Also, @pikahyper, I've often wondered that myself, good point :)

Avatar image for pikahyper
pikahyper

19027

Forum Posts

37057995

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 581

#239  Edited By pikahyper  Moderator
Avatar image for mr_clockwork91
Mr_Clockwork91

2625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#240  Edited By Mr_Clockwork91

@bumpyboo said:

No, I can't really think of a single valid reason to tell other people what to do with their own heart/private parts, it's their business. Also, @pikahyper, I've often wondered that myself, good point :)

This, also I can't understand people say we need to reproduce when we are over populated. Man there are plenty of kids that need adoption.

Avatar image for bumpyboo
BumpyBoo

14977

Forum Posts

270338

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 20

@mr_clockwork91: Agreed. I can understand why people want a child that is "theirs" to a certain extent but having been raised by a parent who is not biologically related to me...I can't see what it has to do with anything. I get that people have that biological urge to reproduce, to varying degrees, but it seems like so much genetic vanity to me :/ Would much rather give a home to a child who already needs one, as it does seem the more responsible decision to make. To each their own though :)

Avatar image for mr_clockwork91
Mr_Clockwork91

2625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#242  Edited By Mr_Clockwork91

@bumpyboo: If a child from another planet can be raised in the middle of nowhere America by a loving couple to be one of the greatest superheros of all time, then I don't think genetics really has anything to do at all.

Avatar image for pikahyper
pikahyper

19027

Forum Posts

37057995

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 581

#243 pikahyper  Moderator

@bumpyboo: luckily that genetic vanity aspect of continuing the bloodline is almost exclusively a male trait and it is in a steady decline.

Avatar image for bumpyboo
BumpyBoo

14977

Forum Posts

270338

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 20

#244  Edited By BumpyBoo

@pikahyper: Yeah it seems to be a bit of an outdated concept, a throwback to a time when men would insist on having a healthy male to pass down traditions and family wealth to? It's nice to see that however gradually, people have come away from that kind of thinking :)

@mr_clockwork91: Ah, so true, that is a great point and to be honest, my favourite thing about Supes in terms of relatability. Really does drive home the point that parenting is about so much more than that :)

Avatar image for pikahyper
pikahyper

19027

Forum Posts

37057995

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 581

#245 pikahyper  Moderator

@bumpyboo: yep, but it is like a lot of things with modern generations (good and bad) and I believe it is a by-product of societies self inflated sense of entitlement, it is more about the self now, so many concepts are ignored or forgotten about: politics, religion, familial legacy, accountability, education, acceptance of others, consequences, community, hard work, responsibility, etc. there will always be individuals that still believe in these older concepts but as time goes on they will continue to decline.

Avatar image for jonez_
Jonez_

11499

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Now look at the first and latest pages.

Moderators make things so boring...

Avatar image for monsterstomp
MonsterStomp

37649

Forum Posts

361

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@racob7 said:

@deerock313: They're only gross if you don't clean them properly, and even if you don't it's still probably cleaner than your mouth. That's why I don't kiss. XD

Its probably cleaner than your mouth because everyone brushes their mouth with poo poo. Saw it on Mythbusters bro.

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#248  Edited By JakeN7

@jonez120: Right? EVERYBODY GO NUTS AGAIN!

You're all homophobic swamp trash (I will make that a thing)!

Nah, but Pika is bringing up awesome points. It's not his fault he's being rational about it.

Avatar image for monsterstomp
MonsterStomp

37649

Forum Posts

361

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

What if there are valid arguments, but we just tend to ignore them?

Avatar image for jaken7
JakeN7

15180

Forum Posts

608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@monsterstomp: Well, that's what the thread is about. Enlighten us.