Nosy, the literary value of ickiness is too much for me to avoid. But I do run off with it a bit too much. I don't care a twit about what gay people do behind closed doors, anymore than I care about what straight people do behind closed.
Obviously you do or else you wouldn't have been talking about saving us from ourselves in your very last post (among many others).
I don't need your back-handed compassion. I know the joys of my own sexuality and I would thank you to butt the fuck out.
I only give a twit when gay people try to make straight people out to be bigots for insisting that "marriage" is a civil union only between a man and a woman. Now all that ickiness you speak of comes out from behind closed doors and into the laws. Thus a twit is given by me.
This is OT here, but can be carried over into your other thread. This is what the definition of bigotry is. Not just disagreeing with something or thinking it icky, but actively opposing it when it comes out from "behind closed doors." See, bigots aren't bigots just for feeling icky about something. They are bigots for wanting to avoid feeling icky by keeping something hidden, suppressed, illegal, etc.
Who's sexual orientation should be honored over another?
Who said anything about honoring one over the other? Apparently you think just like the Christian Nationalists who believe that even recognizing other beliefs (or the lack thereof) puts their own belief on the back burner.
What is it about equal rights do you not understand? Why do you feel so threatened?
1. The way homosexuality theoretically affects the "overall fecundity of humans" is to make some women more fecund than others, which I see as a potential agency of NS.
OK...I've gotten this vibe from you in quite a few posts before this, but I haven't said anything until now.
What is your deal with NS? You speak of it as if it is some major threat and something to be fought against. Is natural selection of the human species a bad thing to you?
I obviously fail to understand your rationale for thinking so, if that is indeed the case.
That said, while we as a species are seemingly beyond many of the environmental factors which would normally be selecting for or against us due to our technological and neurological development, we are not that far removed from the time when an increase in female fecundity would be considered an imperative. Our genes still act accordingly and there may come a time when natural selection acts upon us as a species more strongly than it does now, so I wouldn't be so quick to be rid of this "aberration."
"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -
The Iron Heel by Jack London
"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea
™ Version 4.2
