Medical Questions > Debate Forums > General Debate Forum

Why Does the West Accept Homosexuality? (Page 11)


October 9th, 2007
Especially eHealthy
sillysallie1990 wrote:
Eiri wrote:
agathe wrote:
Yeah but, is nature a good thing?
Natural things good?

Death is natural. And so is immense suffering.

Good and bad are ethics, and ethics cannot be applied to nature.

A wolf is not bad for eating a deer.

A storm is not bad for destroying a town.

So, homosexulaity as a natural thing, cannot be good or bad. Sexuality as nature knows it is not good or bad.

It simply IS.


bravo that was the best! the way you worded it was amazing


Thanks! ^^ Embarassed
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied October 9th, 2007
Especially eHealthy
nightangel73 wrote:
sillysallie1990 wrote:
Eiri wrote:
agathe wrote:
Yeah but, is nature a good thing?
Natural things good?

Death is natural. And so is immense suffering.

Good and bad are ethics, and ethics cannot be applied to nature.

A wolf is not bad for eating a deer.

A storm is not bad for destroying a town.

So, homosexulaity as a natural thing, cannot be good or bad. Sexuality as nature knows it is not good or bad.

It simply IS.


bravo that was the best! the way you worded it was amazing


and there you are again comparing animals who are not conscious of what they are doing with humans who consciously do things..


Humans are animals.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied October 9th, 2007
Especially eHealthy
nightangel73 wrote:

God-Jesus-Holy Ghost All the three are 1. You can use any of the three and are refering to the same thing.

Or you can be like me and refer to Jesus aka the HUMAN MALE ANIMAL MAMMAL. He was a great dude with some awesome ideas. He got killed for those ideas, and that sucks.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 10th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
I 100% agree with you on the above! ^^
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied October 10th, 2007
Especially eHealthy
Jesus was an animal, rar!
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 10th, 2007
Especially eHealthy
Jesus was a social activist. I wish more people would realize that.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 10th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
and a hippie
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied October 10th, 2007
Active User, very eHealthy
and so is the Catholic church
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Eiri wrote:
milletics wrote:
Eiri wrote:
A. I moved this topic since it in no way belongs on the GLBT relationship forms. It is clearly a topic meant for debate, not one supporting or lending supportive advice to people in a GLBT relationship.

B. You're wrong. On so many levels. I don't want to have to quote the dozens and more species of animals that participate in homosexual relations. Can't get much more natural that nature doing it. And considering we are animals and thus, part of nature, the things we do ARE natural.


Yes but some animals eat their own feces. Doesnt make it right or "natural" to do that too.

If an animal does it, then it's automatically "natural". You don't seem to get that concept. An animal is created by nature. Humans are animals.

Is eating poo "gross"? Yes, but gross is again a human construct. I'm pretty sure there's actually a nutritional benefit to consuming feces especially during times of famine.


Having bread dogs for a while. A mother dog will lick there pup to get them to go to the bathroom then consume the waste. While this is discusting, it keeps the puppies from being surrounded in there own fecies. Without the stimulatiojn from the mothers tongue, the puppies wouldnt actually go to the bathroom on there own. Just a bit of information about eating fecies as apparently not being "Natural"
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
Gu£st wrote:
and so is the Catholic church


So is the Catholic church what?
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
Why would homosexuality be immoral? Like many of todays issues it has actually been around for a very long time; it just isn't whispered about in adult only discussions and gossip hour. Seriously; does anyone really think that homosexuality is new?its like womens rights; it took our societies a long while to finally get over the fact that women weren't just property and brood mares; the only reason I can think of for being offended by whom someone else is sleeping with is jealousy and that is poor motivation for bias and predjudice.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
Welcome back meblonde!
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied October 11th, 2007
Especially eHealthy
silentbear777 wrote:
Eiri wrote:
milletics wrote:
Eiri wrote:
A. I moved this topic since it in no way belongs on the GLBT relationship forms. It is clearly a topic meant for debate, not one supporting or lending supportive advice to people in a GLBT relationship.

B. You're wrong. On so many levels. I don't want to have to quote the dozens and more species of animals that participate in homosexual relations. Can't get much more natural that nature doing it. And considering we are animals and thus, part of nature, the things we do ARE natural.


Yes but some animals eat their own feces. Doesnt make it right or "natural" to do that too.

If an animal does it, then it's automatically "natural". You don't seem to get that concept. An animal is created by nature. Humans are animals.

Is eating poo "gross"? Yes, but gross is again a human construct. I'm pretty sure there's actually a nutritional benefit to consuming feces especially during times of famine.


Having bread dogs for a while. A mother dog will lick there pup to get them to go to the bathroom then consume the waste. While this is discusting, it keeps the puppies from being surrounded in there own fecies. Without the stimulatiojn from the mothers tongue, the puppies wouldnt actually go to the bathroom on there own. Just a bit of information about eating fecies as apparently not being "Natural"

I had completely forgotten about that fact! I haven't bred dogs myself, but I know a lot of random information, and that's one of them! See? Natural and beneficial!
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Especially eHealthy
I meant a social activist as in, Jesus fought for the rights of minorities/oppressed groups.

Like like the poor, women, slaves, children, homosexuals....
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied October 11th, 2007
Active User, very eHealthy
The Church is socially actvie and has elements of being hippy.

We fight for the rights of the unborn child, the poor, the women, slaves children and homosexuals and of course we are big on the whole love of god given to us freely, "free love"
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
so you say the church fights for rights..I say bs. It wants conformity and control not individual rights.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
sillyakchick wrote:
Welcome back meblonde!


Thanks sillyakchick.. Smile
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
Jincks013 wrote:
so you say the church fights for rights..I say bs. It wants conformity and control not individual rights.



The church does not want control. I go to church on my free will and follow the teachings on my own free will too. They have never tried to control me or forced me to do anything. They only talk about what Jesus teached. Like to love one another. Of course if you don't go to church and see for yourself what they talk about I guess one can come up with delusional facts of the church wanting to control you.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 11th, 2007
Extremely eHealthy
Right. It tells you what you can say; what you can do; when to eat certain things; which days you are allowed to work; na.. not control at all.. you just pwn'd yourself.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied October 12th, 2007
Active User, very eHealthy
"so you say the church fights for rights..I say bs. It wants conformity and control not individual rights."

Of course the church dosnt want individual rights, Individual rights are a dangerous concept and leads to violation of rights of others, The Church fights for rights of people as a whole what is known as "Human Rights" in human rights some individual rights are negated in order that the human race benefits, individual rights concerns the individual and not the human race as a whole.

The church does not want conformity and control that is a fallacy, but what it does want you will probably consider it along the same lines as conformity and control but it is different and that is "obediance" this obediance is not forced on anyone, people are requested to be obediant but the church does not and really could not force them, we have free will, we submit to the church not for fear or co-errsion but love, now that maybe hard for you to believe but it is true.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
Tags: woman
Quick Reply