obviously, i see it in an entirely different light...and personally, i do NOT see your analogy at all - to me that just is to signify 'greediness'?..and if that's the case, i still fail to see the greediness in a homosexual couple wanting for a biological child to be any more greedy than a heterosexual one desiring the same. if the means exists for assisted reproduction, and it has been deemed acceptable by our culture..i think homosexuals have every right to utilize it as any other couple. b/c personally, who's to say that infertile couples 'deserve' to be 'fixed' then? obviously, nature has already decided they shouldn't have children, so why shouldn't they also have to adopt? hmmmm...perhaps b/c science has developed the means to assist those who need assistance - and we as a culture have encouraged this, and to me, that includes homosexuals. you can reword it however you like...and i will always disagree. you say it's not based on their homosexuality...and yet the only thing that differentiates them is their homosexuality...and i do not think it is yours, or anyone else's 'right' to tell ANY couple, hetero or homo, what they can or can not do for a family. 'let' them adopt? how kind. i say, let all couples choose from the viable alternatives out there.
and...you never even addressed the end of my post. would that be ok? engage in hetero sex to produce a child, then continue on with their homosexual lifestyler? b/c it seesm many take issue with 'how' the homosexual couple has a child..why, i do not know. no matter hoow you say it...sexual orientation should not interfere with assisted reproduction or adoption...and both choices should be available for any couple qualified.
You're right; you know exactly what I mean, I know exactly what you mean, and we're still not going to agree.
Incidentally, no, I don't believe in homosexuals having 'natural sex' with a woman just for a baby, no. That would involve infidelity against his/her partner of whatever sex, and monogamy is a cool thing. Homosexual or heterosexual, monogamy all the way.
'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'
You're right; you know exactly what I mean, I know exactly what you mean, and we're still not going to agree.
Incidentally, no, I don't believe in homosexuals having 'natural sex' with a woman just for a baby, no. That would involve infidelity against his/her partner of whatever sex, and monogamy is a cool thing. Homosexual or heterosexual, monogamy all the way.
yes, indeed. we will not agree on the issue.
as to the scenario...obviously it would be agreed upon infidelity, an extreme choice if one so desperately wants to at least have the chance for a biological child, and all the world is conspiring agains them to limit their rights to choices afforded others.
so yes, i politely agree to disagree with you..as i had earlier and had not further addressed any of your posts, only that of others.
no matter what, best of luck to you and your wife.
as to the scenario...obviously it would be agreed upon infidelity, an extreme choice if one so desperately wants to at least have the chance for a biological child, and all the world is conspiring agains them to limit their rights to choices afforded others.
so yes, i politely agree to disagree with you..as i had earlier and had not further addressed any of your posts, only that of others.
no matter what, best of luck to you and your wife.
Thankyou very much And yes, let's not let this difference of opinion affect anything beyond this thread. We still both like Pearl Jam, right? And incidentally, I bet Eddie Vedder's beliefs would be closer to yours than mine. So you've got that.
'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'
Thankyou very much And yes, let's not let this difference of opinion affect anything beyond this thread. We still both like Pearl Jam, right? And incidentally, I bet Eddie Vedder's beliefs would be closer to yours than mine. So you've got that.
i never take a difference of opinion personally, especially when someone is polite. honestly, i couldn't care less what e'ds beliefs are, they have no bearing on my life whatsoever. it's just very clear that neither one of us will sway the other's thoughts on the topic...and oh well.
personally, i would just like to see whomever would truly like to have a family, biological or adoptive...have their wish come true, b/c no matter what...wanting to give a loving/supportive home to a child, desiring to be a parent, is a good thing.
Of course homosexual couples should be differentiated from infertile couples. If only because one has been dealt a bad deal from nature; one admits to being 'disabled', and the other is (rightfully) offended by the suggestion. And this differentiates them straight off the bat. This is nothing, I repeat, nothing - nothing nothing nothing - to do with sexual orientation. People can have sex with whoever they want as far as I'm concerned. It's to do with the health service's money being spent where it should be spent. The medical profession exists for those who need it. Intervention exists to correct the problems of abnormalities in nature's design.
I can see why your interpretation brings you to such a conclusion. I interpret it differently. I see the medical profession as looking to solve problems for people in order to make money. Granted, many times they deeply care about people, or about the science as well. Like a store owner selling a product, if there is service available, they will not turn away people. And if they begin to do so discriminately, well, that's discrimination and it's against the law.
I just really think that homosexual couples gaining access to medical intervention which was designed for infertile couples...
Neither you nor I can look into the mindset of those who came up with options for childbearing that are of interest to homosexuals. And yet it is just as possible that such individuals when foreseeing the potential of the budding technology, imagined the benefits to many types of people including gay people. Again, you have a different interpretation that makes sense coming from your point of view and yet in no way indicates objective truth any more than other possibilities.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
you know, you and i ahve asked this one several times to several different people and not one of them has been able to give an answer. theoretically if (as someone claimed) the only natural and normal and not deviant way to have sex is vaginal intercourse, then both oral and anal sex should be considered weird and deviant. id like one of these people to own up and tell whether or not they believe this to actually be the case or if they're just searching for justifications for their illogical and emotional disgust with homos.
well? ahnimus? rightondude? who else was saying gay butt sex turns their stomach becos of how unnatural it is? do you let your gf go down on your or vice versa? is it really about scientific opposition to "unnatural acts" or is it your emotional response to something you perceive as wrong and disgusting?
If gay couples want to adopt some of the kids that are without any parents as we speak, they should definitly be allowed to do so. Better to have parents than having orphan kids going from families to families if not just ending up in an institution till their majority....
"L'homme est né libre, et partout il est dans les fers"
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
I can't see how homosexuality is healthy, especially in males. How is fecal matter + reproductive system a good thing. It's an abomination. It's disgusting. Certainly something is very wrong there. It wouldn't take much to know that playing around with fecal waste is about as backwards to the human process as you can get. The male life bearing "device" is literally inserted into human waste. 180 deg out of balance. The sex part makes me want to dry heave endlessly though.
this is the quote im takling about. do you consider a man and woman engaging in anal sex equally dry heave inducing? something very wrong there too isnt there? and if you're talking solely about reproduction... couldnt the same be said of "reproductive system + mouth/saliva"? isnt that equally disgusting and an abomination of nature's healthy intentions for human sexuality? that's what im looking for an explanation of dude. cos i find it hard to believe you've ever turned down a hummer or that you're just as disgusted by the thought of a man having anal sex with his wife as you are of two men doing it. so there's more to your disgust with homosexuality than it simply not being natural or scientific, genetic reasons. you have other, emotional, social, or personal reasons for considering it to be wrong that has little to do with science or reproduction and likely has much much more to do with it undermining or threatening your views on masculinity and how males should behave.
rightondude? ... do you let your gf go down on your or vice versa? is it really about scientific opposition to "unnatural acts" or is it your emotional response to something you perceive as wrong and disgusting?
More importantly, now that you see these questions, are you going to answer them?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
can you read? i didnt say it was. i said if you're talking abuot how the only natural form of sexuality is one man putting his reproductive organ into another woman's reproductive organ, then oral sex is just as unnatural and disgusting and abominable as anal sex. so why is it only anal sex between two gay men that you find disgusting and unnatural? it's obviously got nothing to do with the science of genetics.
so why is anal sex between two men unnatural and disgusting, but oral sex or a man having anal sex with a woman are not? neither is what nature intended, as you say.
In response to post 338 yes it does. What is unnatural and compared to what again? What are you even trying to say?
maybe you were somehow missing soulsinging's point...but he was bringin you back to this:
Originally Posted by decides2dream
btw - the whole anal intercourse thing...seriously, is that it? there are heterosexual couples who engage in such practices...and hello, are you forgetting about lesbians? what's so horrid about them? please.
he had referenced the said above post, was continued to be ingored...he quoted his own post, again, to see if there would be a response....i really can't see how you 'missed' it.
just helping to clarify.
so i think the question is: if the turn-off/aborration of homosexulaity is anal sex and/or the fact that it is 'unnatural'...does not serve a purpose for reproduction...are you equally offended by hetero couples who participate in anal sex, and/or oral sex...since neither serve a purpose to procreation. soulsinging can correct me if i am wrong, but i think that's what he wants answered.
The post makes no sense....the comparison is rediculous?!?...
then why is a man having anal sex with a woman ok and a man having anal sex with a man disgusting? since you're apparently ratehr dense, we'll break it up into baby steps. or perhaps you simply have no response and are trying to dodge to avoid being exposed for the simple homophobe you are.
heterosexually deviant men are now akin to being homosexual?...how are lesbians are equivalent to homosexual men?
why is this so difficult? it is simply...what exactly is so offensive?
two men having anal intercourse
anal intercourse in general
and also...homosexuality encompasses BOTH men and women...gay and lesbian...so if anal sex is the only issue.....where is the disgust or aborration in being a lesbian? question of this thread is...gay people raising children...that does actually encompass lesbians too.
you seem rather verbose when spouting your views, but when asked direct and fair simple questions, all of a sudden quite obtuse.
Comments
You're right; you know exactly what I mean, I know exactly what you mean, and we're still not going to agree.
Incidentally, no, I don't believe in homosexuals having 'natural sex' with a woman just for a baby, no. That would involve infidelity against his/her partner of whatever sex, and monogamy is a cool thing. Homosexual or heterosexual, monogamy all the way.
- the great Sir Leo Harrison
yes, indeed. we will not agree on the issue.
as to the scenario...obviously it would be agreed upon infidelity, an extreme choice if one so desperately wants to at least have the chance for a biological child, and all the world is conspiring agains them to limit their rights to choices afforded others.
so yes, i politely agree to disagree with you..as i had earlier and had not further addressed any of your posts, only that of others.
no matter what, best of luck to you and your wife.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Thankyou very much
- the great Sir Leo Harrison
i never take a difference of opinion personally, especially when someone is polite.
personally, i would just like to see whomever would truly like to have a family, biological or adoptive...have their wish come true, b/c no matter what...wanting to give a loving/supportive home to a child, desiring to be a parent, is a good thing.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Neither you nor I can look into the mindset of those who came up with options for childbearing that are of interest to homosexuals. And yet it is just as possible that such individuals when foreseeing the potential of the budding technology, imagined the benefits to many types of people including gay people. Again, you have a different interpretation that makes sense coming from your point of view and yet in no way indicates objective truth any more than other possibilities.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
well? ahnimus? rightondude? who else was saying gay butt sex turns their stomach becos of how unnatural it is? do you let your gf go down on your or vice versa? is it really about scientific opposition to "unnatural acts" or is it your emotional response to something you perceive as wrong and disgusting?
who, me?
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
What was this in regards to?: "Whaa the faa are you goin on about again????"
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
this is the quote im takling about. do you consider a man and woman engaging in anal sex equally dry heave inducing? something very wrong there too isnt there? and if you're talking solely about reproduction... couldnt the same be said of "reproductive system + mouth/saliva"? isnt that equally disgusting and an abomination of nature's healthy intentions for human sexuality? that's what im looking for an explanation of dude. cos i find it hard to believe you've ever turned down a hummer or that you're just as disgusted by the thought of a man having anal sex with his wife as you are of two men doing it. so there's more to your disgust with homosexuality than it simply not being natural or scientific, genetic reasons. you have other, emotional, social, or personal reasons for considering it to be wrong that has little to do with science or reproduction and likely has much much more to do with it undermining or threatening your views on masculinity and how males should behave.
It is when you talk shit.:D
naděje umírá poslední
I still don't see the original question...
You didn't see this?
More importantly, now that you see these questions, are you going to answer them?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/phil/blphil_eth_gaym_unnat.htm
http://www.tpir.tv/priceless/7/bobspin.mp3
can you read? i didnt say it was. i said if you're talking abuot how the only natural form of sexuality is one man putting his reproductive organ into another woman's reproductive organ, then oral sex is just as unnatural and disgusting and abominable as anal sex. so why is it only anal sex between two gay men that you find disgusting and unnatural? it's obviously got nothing to do with the science of genetics.
so why is anal sex between two men unnatural and disgusting, but oral sex or a man having anal sex with a woman are not? neither is what nature intended, as you say.
That's certainly your perogative.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
maybe you were somehow missing soulsinging's point...but he was bringin you back to this:
Originally Posted by decides2dream
btw - the whole anal intercourse thing...seriously, is that it? there are heterosexual couples who engage in such practices...and hello, are you forgetting about lesbians? what's so horrid about them? please.
he had referenced the said above post, was continued to be ingored...he quoted his own post, again, to see if there would be a response....i really can't see how you 'missed' it.
just helping to clarify.
so i think the question is: if the turn-off/aborration of homosexulaity is anal sex and/or the fact that it is 'unnatural'...does not serve a purpose for reproduction...are you equally offended by hetero couples who participate in anal sex, and/or oral sex...since neither serve a purpose to procreation. soulsinging can correct me if i am wrong, but i think that's what he wants answered.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
see post # 357. i don't think i can make it anymore clear for ya.
what is ridiculous? comparing anal sex to anal sex?
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
then why is a man having anal sex with a woman ok and a man having anal sex with a man disgusting? since you're apparently ratehr dense, we'll break it up into baby steps. or perhaps you simply have no response and are trying to dodge to avoid being exposed for the simple homophobe you are.
why is this so difficult? it is simply...what exactly is so offensive?
two men having anal intercourse
anal intercourse in general
and also...homosexuality encompasses BOTH men and women...gay and lesbian...so if anal sex is the only issue.....where is the disgust or aborration in being a lesbian? question of this thread is...gay people raising children...that does actually encompass lesbians too.
you seem rather verbose when spouting your views, but when asked direct and fair simple questions, all of a sudden quite obtuse.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow