Why I think homosexuality is inferior to Heterosexuality

[Stu Pidasso]

I am posting this in the Politics forum becuase of several request by people in the politics forum to answer this question. The question ties in directly to the debates about gay rights and same sex unions. The post will include quotes from other posts I have made.

Homosexuality does not conform to the usual and ordinary course of nature. If you accept that heterosexuality is the usual and ordinary course of nature you cannot then ascribe those quality to homosexuality. You cannot logically argue that homosexuality and heterosexuality are both the usual and ordinary course of nature unless you're also prepared to include all sorts of perversions such as bestiality.

Homosexual sex(specifically anal sex) does not conform to the usual and ordinary course of nature, heres what I wrote back in January in SMP.

[ QUOTE ]
A gay man who allows his rectum to be penetrated by a penis is not using his rectum in the usual and ordinary course of nature. As Bluffthis! so "eloquently" pointed out, the function of the rectum is essentially that of a sewer pipe. You cannot reasonably claim the usual and ordinary course of nature is for the rectum to have the dual use of a sewer pipe and also that of a surrogate vagina for the homosexual man. If this were the case the rectum would have been created(either by God or evolution) in a manner consistent with that function. The rectum would have the ability to produce natural lubricants(like the vagina) and be supported by a network of muscles(like the vagina). The lining of the rectum would be a multi-layer squamous epithelium able to endure the friction of intercourse without longterm damage.


[/ QUOTE ]

Humans can rationalize:

[ QUOTE ]
A reasonable human male knows that it is not normal for a human male to want to insert his penis into another human male's rectum. He knows, that despite his own desires, the normal receptical for a human male's penis is a human female's vagina.


[/ QUOTE ]

Trying to justify that homosexuality is perfectly normal amoung humans because homosexuality is seen across many different animal species is ridiculous. That whole arguement is degrading to gays as it lowers them to the level of the unrational animal.

Homosexuality is a behavior defect and therefore inferior to heterosexuality. I think deep down people agree with that statement and if homosexuality could be "cured at birth" it would cease to exist in humans.

Stu

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Homosexuality is a behavior defect and therefore inferior to heterosexuality. I think deep down people agree with that statement and if homosexuality could be "cured at birth" it would cease to exist in humans.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Seing homosexuality as a behavior defect is a defect, usually termed bigotry and closed-mindedness.

There is nothing to be "cured" at birth regarding homosexuality. This very view, and your use of language in this way, is an indication of a very poorly developed intellect which I really wish could be cured at birth.

[Moneyline]

This post is so silly that I'm slightly upset with myself for wasting time on it. Nevertheless, I think your argument is not a cogent one. Even if one grants that homosexuality is not "usual and ordinary," which I think is a major stretch, that does not mean that "usual and ordinary" practices are superior to unusual and atypical practices. It is usual and ordinary in nature to want to eat sugary and fatty foods, yet if you continue to feed off a supply of sugary and fatty foods, you become a lardass with rotten teeth and will likely die at an early age of heart disease. Clearly, it would be unusual and atypical for a person to want to avoid all but the smallest amounts of those foods, yet such a person would be healthier, live longer, and enjoy a higher quality of life.

[Stu Pidasso]

Hi Midge

[ QUOTE ]
Seing homosexuality as a behavior defect is a defect, usually termed bigotry and closed-mindedness.

There is nothing to be "cured" at birth regarding homosexuality. This very view, and your use of language in this way, is an indication of a very poorly developed intellect which I really wish could be cured at birth.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ad Hominem's are a reflection of weak mindedness. You want to try to redeem yourself and put together a counter argument?

Stu

[peritonlogon]

This is the only reply I will grant your bigotry.

If you agree that evolution is real.

And you agree that Homosexuality is a condition, not simply a behavior

Then it is either
A) some freak of evolution
or
B) is a beneficial survival trait

If it is A then it should be more or less unheard of in the Animal kingdom. If B the it should be found other places.

Well, it turns out, it is found other places, for example, Penguins. It is likely that Homosexuality finds some balance in the Human gene pool because it serves a peripheral purpose, such as, taking care of children in the event of a family pair getting killed or something along those lines.

But in any event get over it, no one cares whether you think homosexuality is inferior, a defect or whatever. When people say things like "prove it" or "how" it's usually simply to dismiss your bigotry because you make claims that are both rude and unproveable. Come back after you've done some real research and can back up what you're saying with something other than logical deductions from your own opinions.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
This post is so silly that I'm slightly upset with myself for wasting time on it. Nevertheless, I think your argument is not a cogent one. Even if one grants that homosexuality is not "usual and ordinary," which I think is a major stretch, that does not mean that "usual and ordinary" practices are superior to unusual and atypical practices. It is usual and ordinary in nature to want to eat sugary and fatty foods, yet if you continue to feed off a supply of sugary and fatty foods, you become a lardass with rotten teeth and will likely die at an early age of heart disease. Clearly, it would be unusual and atypical for a person to want to avoid all but the smallest amounts of those foods, yet they would be healthier, live longer, and enjoy a higher quality of life.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Moneyline,

Anal sex leads to severe health problems down the line, so in this case the usual and ordinary is better for you than the unusual and atypical.

Stu

[cpk]

[ QUOTE ]
Homosexuality does not conform to the usual and ordinary course of nature. If you accept that heterosexuality is the usual and ordinary course of nature you cannot then ascribe those quality to homosexuality. You cannot logically argue that homosexuality and heterosexuality are both the usual and ordinary course of nature unless you're also prepared to include all sorts of perversions such as bestiality.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is beyond lame.

1. Heterosexuals routinely engage in oral and anal sex.

2. Argument from nature is stupid because society sanctions and subsidizes all sorts of unnatural behavior. Practically everything we do for a living and put to use in our industrialized society is "unnatural."

3. When arguing about gay marriage, it should be obvious that homosexual unions are more than about sex. Humans tend to seek long-term (if not lifelong) companionship. If people feel attracted to the same gender, why should we deny them the social benefits of this companionship and the legal framework to combine incomes and powers of attorney? What, are we going to demand that they grow old broke and alone? What kind of heartless nonsense is that?

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
A gay man who allows his rectum to be penetrated by a penis is not using his rectum in the usual and ordinary course of nature. As Bluffthis! so "eloquently" pointed out, the function of the rectum is essentially that of a sewer pipe. You cannot reasonably claim the usual and ordinary course of nature is for the rectum to have the dual use of a sewer pipe and also that of a surrogate vagina for the homosexual man. If this were the case the rectum would have been created(either by God or evolution) in a manner consistent with that function. The rectum would have the ability to produce natural lubricants(like the vagina) and be supported by a network of muscles(like the vagina). The lining of the rectum would be a multi-layer squamous epithelium able to endure the friction of intercourse without longterm damage.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thisis essentially irrelevent to the discussion. Your veins are not designed to recieve an injection via a needle, and the use of a needle without sterilizing the needle and the outer arm can lead to long term damage, as well as multiple uses of the same vein will lead to collapse. However there are many situations in which using a needle to inject a substance into your vein is vastly superior to not injecting something into your vein. This pretty much makes this point [ QUOTE ]

Homosexuality does not conform to the usual and ordinary course of nature

[/ QUOTE ]
moot. Humans have adapted to overcome weaknesses using intelligence to create tools and to alter nature to suit us better. The natural state of a tree is not in the shape of a house, and yet it is far superior from a human point of view to cut several trees down and fashion them into a structure.

[ QUOTE ]

Trying to justify that homosexuality is perfectly normal amoung humans because homosexuality is seen across many different animal species is ridiculous. That whole arguement is degrading to gays as it lowers them to the level of the unrational animal.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it "lowers" their sexual preference to that of an animal, same with heterosexuals.

[ QUOTE ]


Homosexuality is a behavior defect and therefore inferior to heterosexuality

[/ QUOTE ]


Thats not for you to decide is it? Or more correctly, why is it that you think your personal opinions on the matter should carry any weight in a legal argument about gay rights? What's your background in behavioral studies?

[Stu Pidasso]

Hi Peritonlogon,


If what you say is correct why do we see Polydactylism occurring all the time in nature.

[ QUOTE ]
It is likely that Homosexuality finds some balance in the Human gene pool because it serves a peripheral purpose, such as, taking care of children in the event of a family pair getting killed or something along those lines.


[/ QUOTE ]

You would think homosexualities purpose would be painfully obvious. It does occurs a rate similar to nuerological defects such as bi-polar spectrum disorder. Perhaps bi-polar spectrum disorder serves peripheral purpose too(Its probably just a defect though).

Stu

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
Humans tend to seek long-term (if not lifelong) companionship. If people feel attracted to the same gender, why should we deny them the social benefits of this companionship and the legal framework to combine incomes and powers of attorney? What, are we going to demand that they grow old broke and alone? What kind of heartless nonsense is that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Generally speaking Heterosexuals seek long term relationships. Homosexuals spend most of thier adult time in short term transactional relationships.

Stu