Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   homosexuality
RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 239 (21790)
11-07-2002 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by John
11-06-2002 2:11 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by John:
[B]
quote:
Originally posted by RedVento:
Right, the number that survie to reproduce to survive. So if there are 1 million eggs, and 10% of them survive.. that is 100,000 that can go on to reproduce.
If the same survivability rate is applied to a human then one in 10 of her children will live, over 10 years. That has no bearing on the species?

I really don't understand the argument. Maybe, try again? I confused. [/quote]
What I mean is that by shear numbers alone the chances are better for insects to continue. One female = millions of offspring = good chances. One female = one offspring = chances not so good.
quote:
I am confused again. Maybe you meant to say "... dogs and us DO NOT get our ....."
yea that is what I meant. I type too fast for my own good sometimes.
quote:
I understand that this is the party line, but I don't completely buy it, for reasons I've stated.
Also, all respect due, that the man is a vet does not make him an authority on animal behavior, just as being a doctor does not make one understand people. I once knew a vet who threw a fit because an injured cat-- my injured cat-- scratched him... go figure.
No this is true, but it prolly makes him a better authority than either of us.. this article looks do be done by someone more qualified..
http://www.petfinder.org/journalindex.cgi?path=/public/an...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by John, posted 11-06-2002 2:11 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by John, posted 11-07-2002 2:55 PM RedVento has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 239 (21792)
11-07-2002 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by RedVento
11-07-2002 2:22 PM


quote:
Originally posted by RedVento:
What I mean is that by shear numbers alone the chances are better for insects to continue. One female = millions of offspring = good chances. One female = one offspring = chances not so good.
Back to the example i used, one female (queen bee) and no hive == 0% chance of survival. The queen depends upon the hive for food and protection, and for assistance raising the kids.
One human female without a social structure is in essentially the same boat.
quote:
quote:
I am confused again. Maybe you meant to say "... dogs and us DO NOT get our ....."
yea that is what I meant. I type too fast for my own good sometimes.

The older I get, the more humans seem like the rest of the pack. Humans are not very good at self reflection, despite the hype.
quote:
No this is true, but it prolly makes him a better authority than either of us.. this article looks do be done by someone more qualified..
http://www.petfinder.org/journalindex.cgi?path=/public/an...

Looks like it supports my case. Sexual activity to relieve tension, due to over-- ummmm--- petting, as well as dominance.
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by RedVento, posted 11-07-2002 2:22 PM RedVento has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by RedVento, posted 11-08-2002 10:10 AM John has replied

RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 94 of 239 (21873)
11-08-2002 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by John
11-07-2002 2:55 PM


[QUOTE] Back to the example i used, one female (queen bee) and no hive == 0% chance of survival. The queen depends upon the hive for food and protection, and for assistance raising the kids.
One human female without a social structure is in essentially the same boat.
quote:
No arugment there, but what if there is one viable male for each a bee and a human female. Which has a better chance?
[quote] Looks like it supports my case. Sexual activity to relieve tension, due to over-- ummmm--- petting, as well as dominance.
[/B]
Look at the Why Me, Why Now section.. It gives the reason for mounting/humping for most the majority of the times..
"There are several reasons why dogs engage in mounting behavior beyond the need for procreation. Usually, an un-neutered male dog will mount another male dog as a display of social dominancein other words, as a way of letting the other dog know who’s boss. While not as frequent, a female dog may mount for the same reason"
Tension release is another reason given, but that is not a homosexual trait. Perhaps the issues it that we have different definetions of homosexual. I use homosexual as two same sex people having sexual relations to fullfill both sexual and emotional desires. Not just as getting off with someone of the same sex for any particular reason.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by John, posted 11-07-2002 2:55 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by John, posted 11-08-2002 4:45 PM RedVento has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 95 of 239 (21893)
11-08-2002 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by RedVento
11-08-2002 10:10 AM


quote:
Originally posted by RedVento:
No arugment there, but what if there is one viable male for each a bee and a human female. Which has a better chance?
Probably the human female. Humans are more versatile and a lot smarter. And after mating the male bee dies.
quote:
Perhaps the issues it that we have different definetions of homosexual. I use homosexual as two same sex people having sexual relations to fullfill both sexual and emotional desires. Not just as getting off with someone of the same sex for any particular reason.
Would you apply that definition to humans? If a man 'get's off' with another man, but not for both sexual and emotional reasons, is that not homosexual behavior?
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by RedVento, posted 11-08-2002 10:10 AM RedVento has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by RedVento, posted 11-11-2002 8:59 AM John has replied

Peter
Member (Idle past 1478 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 96 of 239 (22199)
11-11-2002 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by mark24
11-01-2002 11:22 AM


quote:
Originally posted by mark24:
quote:
Actually I do have dogs, and humping is not a sign of homosexuality, it is how dogs jocky for position withing the pack. Aggressive dogs(male or female) will hump others to show that they are higher in the pack heirarchy. My dog has been known to hump my cats for that very reason, unless you are going to tell me that my dog is both a lesbian AND into bestiality.
Curious. My ol' mum has 3 BITCHES, & two of them hump...... ME!!!!! Not Mum, not Dad, not my brother or sister, just me! Now, I do love those dogs (but not that much!), & probably make more of a fuss of them than most. Is it then indicative that they are putting me in my place? This is more disturbing than I first thought, I'm being usurped!
Oh well, there goes the "animal magnetism" theory......
Mark

According to conventional dog-training thinking you are being
viewed as an equal ... most likely because you interact with them
in a manner consistent with sibling playing, and do not assert
dominance over them.
Whether that's true or not I have no idea, but several characteristics
of modern dog training seem to work for me.
Do you fuss the dogs whenever they come to you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by mark24, posted 11-01-2002 11:22 AM mark24 has not replied

RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 97 of 239 (22214)
11-11-2002 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by John
11-08-2002 4:45 PM


quote:
Probably the human female. Humans are more versatile and a lot smarter. And after mating the male bee dies.
Except that the one male bee will allow the queen bee to lay thousands of eggs...
quote:
Would you apply that definition to humans? If a man 'get's off' with another man, but not for both sexual and emotional reasons, is that not homosexual behavior?
Well maybe if you can explain why a man would "get-off" for some reason other than to relieve sexual desire/tension...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by John, posted 11-08-2002 4:45 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by John, posted 11-11-2002 10:50 AM RedVento has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 98 of 239 (22231)
11-11-2002 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by RedVento
11-11-2002 8:59 AM


quote:
Originally posted by RedVento:
Except that the one male bee will allow the queen bee to lay thousands of eggs
You asked whether I thought one male and one female human would have a better chance of survival than one and one female bee. This is a different question than asking which has the better chance IF they survive to reproduce.
quote:
Would you apply that definition to humans? If a man 'get's off' with another man, but not for both sexual and emotional reasons, is that not homosexual behavior?
Well maybe if you can explain why a man would "get-off" for some reason other than to relieve sexual desire/tension...
[/B][/QUOTE]
Dominance.
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by RedVento, posted 11-11-2002 8:59 AM RedVento has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by RedVento, posted 11-13-2002 9:08 AM John has replied

RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 239 (22461)
11-13-2002 9:08 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by John
11-11-2002 10:50 AM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
quote:
Well maybe if you can explain why a man would "get-off" for some reason other than to relieve sexual desire/tension...
Dominance.
That would most likely be akin to rape, and not necessarily homosexual, but definetly deviant behavior. Most men I know who wish to show dominance over another man won't force them into a sexual act, they might beat them up, or verbally degrade them, or humiliate them in some other way. So while it may not be homosexual in nature it is most probably highly unlikely, where as with dogs its quite common. Dogs humping != homosexual, men humping men == homosexual except in your very, very, very rare exception.
Red

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by John, posted 11-11-2002 10:50 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by John, posted 11-13-2002 11:12 AM RedVento has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 239 (22485)
11-13-2002 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by RedVento
11-13-2002 9:08 AM


quote:
Originally posted by RedVento:
That would most likely be akin to rape
Rape pretty much is about dominance.
quote:
and not necessarily homosexual, but definetly deviant behavior.
Are you taking the position that homosexual rape isn't homosexual?
quote:
Most men I know who wish to show dominance over another man won't force them into a sexual act, they might beat them up, or verbally degrade them, or humiliate them in some other way.
On a broader scale it does happen though. Homosexual rape of defeated enemies is, or was, common in some cultures.
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by RedVento, posted 11-13-2002 9:08 AM RedVento has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by RedVento, posted 11-14-2002 9:16 AM John has not replied

RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 101 of 239 (22666)
11-14-2002 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by John
11-13-2002 11:12 AM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
[B]
quote:
Originally posted by RedVento:
That would most likely be akin to rape
Rape pretty much is about dominance.
quote:
and not necessarily homosexual, but definetly deviant behavior.
Are you taking the position that homosexual rape isn't homosexual? [/quote]
Yes, actually I am. Actually I already took the position that homosexual sex done for reasons other than sexual desire/need are not really "homosexual." In this case sex is an ends to a means(rape to dominate) and fullfills the need to dominate. This is the same reason I gave for dog humping not being homosexual. There is no sexual gratification from the act, humping, just as rape in this case, fullfills a different desire all together. [quote]
quote:
Most men I know who wish to show dominance over another man won't force them into a sexual act, they might beat them up, or verbally degrade them, or humiliate them in some other way.
On a broader scale it does happen though. Homosexual rape of defeated enemies is, or was, common in some cultures.
[/B]
I am sure it did, and possibly still does. However based on my definiton of what homosexuality is rape isnt included. Ofcourse this is all based on my opinion of what homosexual is really about. In case you are wondering how I came to this conclusion it is really quite simple. For homosexual sex to truly be homosexual both parties must be willing participants. They are together to satisfy their sexual desires/lusts/love, the fact that they are the same sex makes it homosexual. In the case of rape one party is definetly not willing, and the needs of only one party are being met. Plus those needs are not sexual, so the rape cannot be considered a homosexual act.
Red

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by John, posted 11-13-2002 11:12 AM John has not replied

allen
Guest


Message 102 of 239 (22683)
11-14-2002 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
10-24-2002 10:16 AM


Religions and other anti-gay groups picture gays as wanton sinners lusting to seduce small boys. The truth is heterosexual males are, in general, far more abusive towards young victims than homosexual males are. To learn more about homophobia, read Blumenfeld (1992). About 2300 years ago, Plato wrote a defense of homosexuality, titled Symposium. On certain topics we are slow learners
-----------------------------------------------------------
Take the citys of sodom and gahmorah, God distroyed thoes cities
because of that very sin.And for you to say heterosexual males are in general far more abusive to wards young victims than homosexual males are, is quite a slap in anyones face just reading your wording of thought that you so unshamefully post for others to read.
I do not believe ,(after speaking to several homosexual males recently because of ;your post), that being homosexual is either a learned or born act of sexual preversion knowingly acted out because of self desireable pleasure one feels doing the act, but in that the act is self pleasure in knowingly doing what one is not born or created to do. Therefore, homosexuals are acting out and choosing to perform preverse sexual doings outside the God given purpose of re creating life itself thru the normal choosing God has commanded man and woman to do ..go and multiply thy seed and be fruitful.. not :
go and lay with your same sex partner and have anal sex and victimise little boys (or girls) to fulfill your preverse sexual desires..
I have even heard the excuse for being gay is: "I was born with the gene that causes my maleness to become female as i grew up by knowing my way was intended to be gay".. SHOULD have been said like this: I was born, then i became sexually active,and I followed my perverse sexual desires, and spit in the face of God by doing the complete opposite of what man was commanded to do in the garden of eden. I personally must admit that to this day i cannot understand or find a true reason for a man to become a sexual partner with another man/ or a woman doing so in this same matter. Some reasons i have heard were, "I'm gay because: my father was crippled and he made me perform oral sex on him, because my mother left after his accident.. and i loved my father and did this for him , and now i am gay.. or, i have a gene that programed me to be gay, and that gene kicked in after my 12th birthday.END.
The things that I can conclude that a homosexual gains after sex are, less than expected/ aids/hurt/acute lust mode/anal discomfort/loose stools/loss days from work/ multiple sex partners/and death from medical incurables. I for one do not stand for such an act of homosexualality./ Tho i have never beaten up a homosexual, I never will slap one in the face.. because Jesus forgives all sin, no matter what the sin is..and for your information, this topic hits home rather close with me , as i have a sister who is twice married to another woman, tho i am not proud, i love her the most out of 5 sisters in my family..God does tell us: The wages of sin is death..lets not slap God in the face again..just get out of the sin you are in.. that is what i tell all homosexuals that i converse with..Remember: YOU CHOOSE WHAT YOU DO, SO YOU CHOOSE YOUR OWN PUNISHMENT.. because all sin has a wage to it...
Plese think what you will...post what you will in responce to my posted reply..i welcome all who post harshly or lovingly...I mean no harm to anyone that is homosexual.. just remember this..it is in my own family..and has been for years...tho i did not choose to become homosexual...i see it everyday. Sin can be forgiven, if you ask for forgiveness. It is too easy to get out of homosexuality..just ask Jesus to forgive you, and He will,,and He does it with the largest amout of love.. and I wont hate you for being homosexual..Because there is a forgiving God at hand..we just need to go to him and simply ask for forgivness..I let God take control, not man. For in the end, it is Jesus who will judge.
Take no offence to my post, it is just how i feel.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 10-24-2002 10:16 AM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by John, posted 11-14-2002 11:25 AM You replied
 Message 107 by David unfamous, posted 11-14-2002 3:50 PM You replied

  
Karl
Inactive Member


Message 103 of 239 (22692)
11-14-2002 11:22 AM


Simple fact - the vast majority of child abusers are heterosexual. Gay men are attracted to other adult men, not children.
You really believe that just asking God will make the homosexual heterosexual? Not so; there are a lot of ex-ex-gays out there who will tell you it didn't work.

John
Inactive Member


Message 104 of 239 (22694)
11-14-2002 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by allen
11-14-2002 10:59 AM


Allen darling,
I thought you'd left me.
quote:
Take the citys of sodom and gahmorah, God distroyed thoes cities
because of that very sin.

Myth.
quote:
And for you to say heterosexual males are in general far more abusive to wards young victims than homosexual males are, is quite a slap in anyones face just reading your wording of thought that you so unshamefully post for others to read.
How exactly is the truth a slap in the face? The studies have been done my friend. And the frequency of child rape goes way up in fundamentalist families as well.
quote:
go and lay with your same sex partner and have anal sex
OK.
quote:
and victimise little boys (or girls) to fulfill your preverse sexual desires..
Sorry, that's what fundies do. You must be confused.
quote:
The things that I can conclude that a homosexual gains after sex are, less than expected/ aids/hurt/acute lust mode/anal discomfort/loose stools/loss days from work/ multiple sex partners/and death from medical incurables.
LOL!!!!!!!!!! Rolling on the floor!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But seriously.... you are full of crap. I don't know how else to respond to this garbage.
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
[This message has been edited by John, 11-14-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by allen, posted 11-14-2002 10:59 AM allen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by allen, posted 11-14-2002 3:46 PM John has not replied

Karl
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 239 (22704)
11-14-2002 11:49 AM


Oh - and chapter and verse proving that it was homosexuality that got Sodom destroyed would be appreciated.

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by allen, posted 11-14-2002 7:20 PM Karl has not replied

allen
Guest


Message 106 of 239 (22747)
11-14-2002 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by John
11-14-2002 11:25 AM


Allen darling,
I thought you'd left me.
------------------------------------------------
Hi again John! Long time no speak. lol
Man you make me laugh...and from your response, I assume you are gay?
I dont want to burst your bubble John Darling lol...but please stop trying to be the butter on my bread...i find you tasteless in your
snide remarks you so often post in responce to my post....yes i did declair that i would accept all nice and not so nice post..so i accept your post also John... but...knowing you from the past, i find you rather hostile to my being.. tho you cause me to respond to you because, and only because you know how to get my goat..(please dont make a homosexual post about the goat ok John). . . it's a figure of speach... but i do remember how i had to enevitably explain myself to alphelion to you..but i'd rather just comment anymore...so have fun John...i have gotten a litte more tollerant in my old age. lol.
especially to you! (Darling).
AS FOR THE PROOF ON THE cause of distruction for Sodom/Ghamorah City...the bible just states that The citys sins reached the throne of God, and it names some of the sins that caused it to be burnt up. Some of the sins were named: ie: men lovers of men.. beastiality, whoremongerers..murder and on and on... i know that they were not nice people when Lot said to God. will you spare the city if there were even one righteous person in the City,, and God said there were not as many even as one..Im sure you can read your bible that shows the particulars to satisfy your mindset on the subject.. im not one who can quote scripture precisely.. tho i believe many of you out there can come to my aid, and help my feeble mind with the details so many of you readers neither read for yourselves...just to provoke additional pricking to others your inquisitive questions to downtrodden my lack of precision in a particular subject...nuff said.
P>S John Darling... Jesus still loves you, and wants you to give your heart to Him.. how long will you continue to walk on the path to destruction.
allen ..and yes John.. just like Jesus loves you...i do too..so..come to Jesus now..for your soul may be required of you as you sleep.
Read Romans 10: verses 9-10 , that is how you come to Jesus.
Please dont get offended to my post..its just what i feel.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by John, posted 11-14-2002 11:25 AM John has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by John, posted 11-14-2002 4:17 PM You replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024