Well you will never find a gay lion or elephant or any other animal so does it mean that it is against the rule of nature?If so then why are humans defying the rule of nature as we know that any species that defies the law of nature never survive.Or do you believe that it is just something that the humans do as they are more mentally advance then any other animal so they can have any sought of sexual orientation they want!
Homosexuality:Against Nature??
Started by
Guest_Godfather007
, Dec 29 2010 12:44 PM
22 replies to this topic
#2
Guest_foldedclothes
Guest_foldedclothes
-
- Guest
Posted 29 December 2010 - 05:27 PM
Well, physically speaking-obviously it is, and not all animals are created with only one genitalia (they are called hermaphrodites) so you can never say that these hermaphrodites are male or female because they are both. But you can never say that they are gay because they can't reason like human beings. They don't have a choice because they only act according to their instinct. People were created with only one reproductive organ except of course for hermaphrodites (preferred to be called intersexuals as they know their gender identification well, the explanation is too long so maybe you can just visit this but then again they were created with the ability to reason, the ability to choose, the ability to think right way beyond animal intelligence. That's why it's already in their nature to make decisions- be it they want to be gay or not. It's all about "gender preferences" (although they can't change their gender and maybe if they did some sex change or something, there will always be some problems that they will encounter. So in my opinion, they should just love and accept what they are and be proud and contented-it's for their own good).BUT if we are going to talk about divine law which is also nature- related, according to the bible, There are only 2 genders (humanly speaking), a male is created to become male and a female to become a female. It will be against God to choose whatever gender you like because God created you the way you are- a male or female.He has plans for all- changing what he wants for you is like neglecting his plans and who are we to not accept his plans? Humans were also created to procreate and thus given reproductive organs. If a male prefers to become a female or vice- versa, it will be against God's plan thus considered as a grave sin. (we are not debating against divine law so I prefer not to discuss further as it will only create off-topic discussions)To sum it all up, It is only natural for humans to decide what they prefer. It's only natural for them to have a choice, like I said "gender preference". But they can never change what they really are because they were created that way.
#3
Guest_Godfather007
Guest_Godfather007
-
- Guest
Posted 29 December 2010 - 11:00 PM
@foldedclothesThe topic wasn't about being male or female or about changing your sex. It was about whether being attracted towards the member of the same sex is right or wrong.And if you look it in this way that if all the members of a species become homosexual then that species will never survive as they will have no off-springs and hence the species will be extinct.So it is against nature to be gay.
#4
Ragamuffin
-
- Dragon's Sentinel
-
- 637 posts
Old Man Internet
Reputation: 232
Perfected
Posted 29 December 2010 - 11:57 PM
I don't have time to respond to too many debates today, so I'll just respond to this one.Homosexuality has indeed been observed in other animals. While the reasons behind it (dominance, bonding, desperation, etc.) in many parts of the animal kingdom are poorly understood, it doesn't take away from the fact that many animals have been observed engaging in same sex relations. Bonobos are known bisexuals; they are constantly having sex with each other as a means of bonding, especially females. Certain species of male dolphins have been known to practice gay sex when females aren't available for long periods of time.Taken from this article.
Homosexuality usually isn't a major focus when studying animals in the wild, but it has been observed and documented so many times that I find it surprising that you'd make a topic suggesting that only humans can be gay or practice gay sex. It's not exactly my favorite subject either, but there you go.The bonobo, an African ape closely related to humans, has an even bigger sexual appetite. Studies suggest 75 percent of bonobo sex is nonreproductive and that nearly all bonobos are bisexual. Frans de Waal, author of Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape, calls the species a "make love, not war" primate. He believes bonobos use sex to resolve conflicts between individuals.
A state of war only serves as an excuse for domestic tyranny. -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
#5
Guest_foldedclothes
Guest_foldedclothes
-
- Guest
Posted 30 December 2010 - 09:30 AM
Yes, you can say it is and that is what I also said.@foldedclothesThe topic wasn't about being male or female or about changing your sex. It was about whether being attracted towards the member of the same sex is right or wrong.And if you look it in this way that if all the members of a species become homosexual then that species will never survive as they will have no off-springs and hence the species will be extinct.So it is against nature to be gay.
I just expanded the idea and I added the thought that humans are naturally able to reason. So, naturally, they CAN think or choose to be gay BUT it is against what they are. I just think that there can be two things to be pondered upon when we talk about this topic, 1. The nature of the mind of a human being and 2. the nature of the physical form of a human being. SO maybe I can say that if one or the two conditions aren't met, then homosexuality is against nature. WHICH is what happened so I agree that it is against nature.Humans were also created to procreate and thus given reproductive organs.
#6
Guest_Rayadragon
Guest_Rayadragon
-
- Guest
Posted 03 January 2011 - 05:30 AM
Personally, I don't think it is against nature. As was already stated, there are other animal species in which homosexuality has been documented (my personal favorite ancedote beingthis). As such, you can't use the argument that humans are the only animals which practice homosexuality.Some of what I think about for this type of debate is what exactly sex is suppost to accomplish. While we normally think of it as reproduction (hence reproductive organs and Godfather's position), there's more to it than that. The flip side of the argument for me is that if someone is unable to reproduce (aka infertile for some reason), then by engaging in sex they are also acting against nature, if reproduction is the only reason for sex. Additionally, we should be pushing for those who are sexually mature to have sex for reproduction purposes, which is generally considered a bad thing if said person is under the age of 18. While you're right that if everyone were to suddenly become gay then the species would die out, it's doubtful that this particular situation is going to come about anytime soon. There's actually potential evolutionary advantages associated with homosexuality, such as potential family group survivability increases.
they can have any sought of sexual orientation they want!
This type of thought bothers me a lot, actually. While it's a personal ancedote, not one gay person I've known ever thought of it as being a choice. I still vividly remember one of my college friends crying when he came out, because he had tried so hard to be "normal" and didn't want to think of himself as a freak. The sarcastic response to "well they choose to be gay" is "well when did you choose to be straight?" Their attraction to a member of the same sex may lead to a reproductive dead end (there's certainly gay and lesbian couples today who have had genetically related children, through previous straight marriges, surrogates, or sperm donors), however, I don't feel like it's anything they could actually choose to become, nor is it specifically against nature.So, naturally, they CAN think or choose to be gay
#7
Endymion_Mallorn
-
- Active Member
-
- 624 posts
Dragon
Reputation: 2
Neutral
Posted 03 January 2011 - 06:15 AM
I don't really like posting in threads like this, because they get my back up and so on. But I'm going to just say this much.I feel that the sudden spike in homosexuality is a sign of our genetic issues. I'm not going into a whole huge rant, but my thinking goes along the lines of the following. The human body has pretty strong instincts about reproduction, and those not only override, but form, our perceptions of sexuality and so on. If the instincts are strong enough, and there's a flaw strong enough from birth, the body cuts itself off.There's another cause as well, I think. I think it has to do with overpopulation (like certain fish and frogs that change gender when the community is lacking). We're cutting ourselves off.I don't see it as right or wrong.
#8
skulhedface
-
- Member
-
- 211 posts
Serpent
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 06 January 2011 - 10:36 PM
Could you also argue that the spike in same-sex relations isn't representative of more people becoming gay, merely that, now that it's socially acceptible, that more people are admitting to it openly?In the end, what does it matter? Animals in fact DO participate in homosexual behavior. It's not necessarily anything other than instinct or dominance or whathaveyou, but the thing is, they aren't sitting there thinking "Is this wrong?" It's, in my opinion, not against nature, but typically against people who are horrified and project that onto others. Some overbearingly heterosexual people on the surface can feel extreme homophobia for latent homosexual feelings, etc, etc, etc... I don't want to get into THAT, necessarily, but I don't think it's against nature any more than medical science is because it keeps people alive longer than "God" meant them to. Like having cancer and getting cured of it, isn't THAT against nature? After all, "nature" gave you cancer.
#9
Guest_PeTaK_93
Guest_PeTaK_93
-
- Guest
Posted 07 January 2011 - 12:45 PM
[quote name='skulhedface' date='Jan 6 2011, 10:36 PM' post='4912233']Could you also argue that the spike in same-sex relations isn't representative of more people becoming gay, merely that, now that it's socially acceptible, that more people are admitting to it openly?In the end, what does it matter? Animals in fact DO participate in homosexual behavior. It's not necessarily anything other than instinct or dominance or whathaveyou, but the thing is, they aren't sitting there thinking "Is this wrong?" It's, in my opinion, not against nature, but typically against people who are horrified and project that onto others. Some overbearingly heterosexual people on the surface can feel extreme homophobia for latent homosexual feelings, etc, etc, etc... I don't want to get into THAT, necessarily, but I don't think it's against nature any more than medical science is because it keeps people alive longer than "God" meant them to. Like having cancer and getting cured of it, isn't THAT against nature? After all, "nature" gave you cancer.[/quotehuman and animal not same...but its got same gender right?? male and female..but have you all ever seen animal become homo?? whoa...thats really2 against nature..so its same with human..i hate homo people!!!..GPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - tedsb16
#10
MONKEYMAN8
-
- Member
-
- 68 posts
Hatchling
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 07 January 2011 - 01:40 PM
http://www.nytimes.c...4animals-t.htmloh look homosexual animals, so it's not unnatural unless you redefine unnatural to mean "Something I don't agree with."As for hating homos, I hate bigots go figure.GPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - Kibahuman and animal not same...but its got same gender right?? male and female..but have you all ever seen animal become homo?? whoa...thats really2 against nature..so its same with human..i hate homo people!!!..Could you also argue that the spike in same-sex relations isn't representative of more people becoming gay, merely that, now that it's socially acceptible, that more people are admitting to it openly?In the end, what does it matter? Animals in fact DO participate in homosexual behavior. It's not necessarily anything other than instinct or dominance or whathaveyou, but the thing is, they aren't sitting there thinking "Is this wrong?" It's, in my opinion, not against nature, but typically against people who are horrified and project that onto others. Some overbearingly heterosexual people on the surface can feel extreme homophobia for latent homosexual feelings, etc, etc, etc... I don't want to get into THAT, necessarily, but I don't think it's against nature any more than medical science is because it keeps people alive longer than "God" meant them to. Like having cancer and getting cured of it, isn't THAT against nature? After all, "nature" gave you cancer.
#11
Wolf O'Donnell
-
- Active Member
-
- 374 posts
Winged Serpent
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 08 January 2011 - 01:28 PM
Maybe homosexuality is against nature. Maybe it isn't. There's scientific evidence to suggest that homosexuality may have a biological basis:http://www.sciencema...3/1034.abstracthttp://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/18561014But these studies aren't very well conceived, primarily due to the number of test subjects partipciating.Some would argue that due to genetic relatedness, homosexuals aren't against nature. Homosexuals in society can look after the children of their heterosexual brothers or sisters, ensuring that at least some copies of their genes survive (those that are present in their relations). You could argue that homosexuals are those destined to remove unwanted genes from the gene pool and you should let them be. Anything that is argued for or against is ultimately speculative; true, we can point to some scientific studies that suggest there is a biological basis, but it sitll doesn't provide the whole picture.Some, posting in this topic, however, are falling into the natural fallacy that what is natural is right. If we are really to say that natural is right, then we must argue that it is wrong to dye wool, it is wrong to make computers, it is wrong to make aeroplanes, it is wrong to have hospitals because all these things and more, defy nature. Do we not defy nature when we operate on people to remove cancers? Do we not defy nature when we fly in the air in aluminium vehicles? Is it morally wrong to make a boat and sail across water? Is it morally wrong to build a house out of bricks and plastic and metal? Natural does not make right. Besides, that's not the focus of this argument. The argument is whether it is natural or not.
Repeatedly eating Star Fox characters since: 1998.
(Evidence of writing talent (or lack of it) exists at the following places:
http://www.fanfictio...t/~wolfodonnell
http://www.fictionpr...m/~wolfodonnell
http://www.starwing.co.uk
#12
Guest_Kirikzan
Guest_Kirikzan
-
- Guest
Posted 08 January 2011 - 08:26 PM
of corse it is but surley the reason humans have an active amd powerful consciousness is so that we can make dessicions so if some one c is homosexual then that is their nature and thats ho they areGPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - tedsb16
#13
Klokinator
-
- Active Member
-
- 156 posts
You Just Got Klokked
Reputation: 6
Neutral
Posted 09 January 2011 - 12:52 AM
I post big posts all the time. Time for a shorter one.
This is possibly the best arument for homosexuality I've heard in a long time. Sure, I think a couple of guys "doing it" is nasty and disgusting, but as long as they don't throw it in my face, then I don't particularly care. Defying nature happens all the time and as you brought out it's hypocritical to point the fingers at gays and lesbians and not a host of other things.Some, posting in this topic, however, are falling into the natural fallacy that what is natural is right. If we are really to say that natural is right, then we must argue that it is wrong to dye wool, it is wrong to make computers, it is wrong to make aeroplanes, it is wrong to have hospitals because all these things and more, defy nature. Do we not defy nature when we operate on people to remove cancers? Do we not defy nature when we fly in the air in aluminium vehicles? Is it morally wrong to make a boat and sail across water? Is it morally wrong to build a house out of bricks and plastic and metal? Natural does not make right. Besides, that's not the focus of this argument. The argument is whether it is natural or not.
On that day, a brother was lost and a race was wiped out...
#14
Guest_teenNet
Guest_teenNet
-
- Guest
Posted 16 January 2011 - 01:24 PM
i don't think it's against nature. nature is about surviving. with survival includes being able to be satisfied and happy which means not suffering. if an organism is happy when it's with the same sex, nature allows it to do so. it's really important for an organism to enjoy life and if homosexuality is their way of enjoying life, let it be.
#15
Guest_Tristea
Guest_Tristea
-
- Guest
Posted 18 January 2011 - 03:40 AM
I don't even think that would be against nature. Heck, humans do break/bend the rules of nature. We were never supposed to be creatures that can create creations our owns or formulate words. We began from an inevitable change. If you feel disturbed by homosexuality, I do not understand. I may not be one but I do not mind them. They are after all humans. Hormones happen to be hormones fatal attraction have to be fatal. We can not deny them or ourselves.
#16
Guest_jorge209
Guest_jorge209
-
- Guest
Posted 21 January 2011 - 05:46 PM
Personally im agains homosexuality. i know its a sin, and on the other hand, it may have some kind of genitic component. it may be linked to a recessive gene that fights off disease. so i heard in classGPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - tedsb16
#17
Guest_Godfather007
Guest_Godfather007
-
- Guest
Posted 03 March 2011 - 11:29 AM
@tristea well i think that it is against nature a man having sex with another man will be crazy as it wont have any benifits as because they wont be able to produce any baby so what does it help for, suppose if everyone becomes a gay/lesbian then the human race would be extinct because of it's own fault!GPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - tedsb16
#18
Guest_Nyoh
Guest_Nyoh
-
- Guest
Posted 04 March 2011 - 05:14 PM
Is homosexuality natural or against the rules of nature? Well, homosexuality has been documented in nature, so technically, wouldn't that make it natural? Black Swans, for example, have been documented as having two males paired up and living together only to, for a short time, form a threesome with a female. However, once the female has laid an egg, they chase her away and then hatch and raise it on their own. As you can see here.However, as Wolf O'Donnell said, is "natural" really the same as "right"? Personally, I don't think so. We live in a society that is far from natural and unless we want to condemn our entire society and go back to living in caves, we are just going to have to step back from what is or isn't natural. I mean, you could, for example, argue that if man was meant to fly, we would have been born with wings. And yet we fly in aeroplanes. That is hardly natural and certainly against the laws of nature, isn't it? Furthermore, we conduct experiments for a variation of different reason, sometimes on animals for something as low as make-up. And make-up is worn by a large part of the human population but I think we can all agree that make-up isn't natural. So, should we ban make-up, then? Should we be disgusted by people (yes, people, not women) who wear make-up the same way we are by homosexuals? Hardly, and the biggest issue with that comparison is that wearing make-up is a choice. I can choose not to wear make-up, so I don't. Whereas being homosexual, as far as my readings on the subject has lead me to conclude, is not a choice. There are people who will fight their entire lives against their homosexuality, and something you have to suppress like that cannot be a choice made by one's own will, I believe. Some will argue that it is, but I do not think so. You can't choose who you are attracted to and you can't choose the gender you're attracted to. Besides, sometimes, having two males as a parent can be beneficial for an offspring because in nature, it can give them a higher chance to survive because their parents are both male and therefore more adapt at protecting them.
#19
Guest_BlueNinjaTiger
Guest_BlueNinjaTiger
-
- Guest
Posted 04 March 2011 - 05:58 PM
Homosexuality occurs in nature. Animals have homosexual sex. If it occurs in nature, it is natural. That said, as several posters have pointed out, natural does not mean right. natural: existing in or formed by nature ( opposed to artificial) http://dictionary.re.../browse/naturalright: in accordance with what is good, proper, or just. http://dictionary.re...om/browse/rightNow, to address whether homosexuality is right. I am a Christian. God instructs me and all Christians (and all people for that matter, but non-Christians choose not to listen or believe) that homosexuality is wrong."Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." Leviticus 18:22 NIV Teen Study Bible."Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." Leviticus 18:22 King James Version.God is very clear here that homosexuality is a sin. That said, I do have several friends who are professed homosexuals. Although I do not accept or condone their choice/action/belief, I tolerate it. Remember, TOLERANCE is NOT ACCEPTANCE.Tolerance:Allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference. http://www.google.co...lient=firefox-aI tolerate because just as I am taught that homosexuality is wrong, I am taught that it is more important that I love everyone:In answer the question of which commandment is greatest, Jesus says, "...the second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" Mark 12:31So although homosexuality is a sin, I do not treat anyone as inferior for it. I do not tell homosexuals they will burn in hell. That isn't my job to decide, it is a subject between them and God. I of course tell them what I believe and why I think they should too, but I never force my beliefs upon them.Now, for the final note, a previous post mentioned the question of whether homosexuality was a "choice" or whether people are "born" homosexual. Try this:Homosexuality is a sexual preference. Period. In the Bible it is not listed as its own special abomination, it is listed along with a slew of other sexual sins in Leviticus 18. Liking it hard, liking it soft, liking it standing up, liking it with another person, liking it in the butt, all are sexual preferences. Liking it with the same sex and liking it with the opposite sex are as well. Some people have sexual preferences that all in our society agree as abominable: pedophilia, incest. Various fetishes, although not entirely disapproved of, are sexual preferences. Everyone is born with their own sexual preferences. You know just think about it, what you like when you have sex. You don't arbitrarily decide you like sex one way or another.That said, there IS a choice here. The choice is not whether you have homosexual desires, the choice is whether to act upon those desires. Every single person who has "come out of the closet" shows this. They will tell you, they struggled with their "sexuality" for a long time, before they "came out." They know they didn't choose to have the feelings they have. The day they announced their homosexuality, however, they made a choice. They chose to be open. They chose to embrace their feelings.I have more to say, but no time now. Perhaps it will be said in reply to replies on this post.Well you will never find a gay lion or elephant or any other animal so does it mean that it is against the rule of nature?If so then why are humans defying the rule of nature as we know that any species that defies the law of nature never survive.Or do you believe that it is just something that the humans do as they are more mentally advance then any other animal so they can have any sought of sexual orientation they want!
#21
Guest_leana
Guest_leana
-
- Guest
Posted 21 April 2011 - 08:27 AM
well you'll never see an animal in nature plant a nuclear bomb in another animal's area. so we can't really compare human nature to the nature of wild animals can we? humans are different, we are unique from wild animals. before we start judging everyone around us, we must judge ourselves first.GPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - Channel28
#22
Guest_master_jeremiah
Guest_master_jeremiah
-
- Guest
Posted 30 April 2011 - 10:37 PM
Contrary to the premise that homosexuality is against nature, I believe that it doesn't defy anything, more so nature. First and foremost, it has never been dictated that there are only two genders that are to inhabit this world. No evidence in the realm of science could prove that. Also, saying that it is "against" somewhat connotes a negative reaction or result. However, the society of today proves that it is more of the positive effects these homosexuals as we say contribute not only to nature but also to other specific matters such as art, literature, technology, health, and many more. Given these arguments, i would reiterate that homosexuals are living their lives for nature.
#23
Guest_alterspaces
Guest_alterspaces
-
- Guest
Posted 05 May 2011 - 09:27 AM
yes, homosexuality is an intelligently-made decision for people. I don't think we were born to be homosexual(for those who are now). So it's unnatural, and doesn't propagate the species through time since it's nonreproductive and only for enjoyment purposes. I don't think there's a moral wrong to this though, it has nothing to do with whether you're good or bad, just your choice on something that's less than normal. Anyways- this is a human construct. or it's a nonreproductive sexual act- not natural, but sometimes performed 'cause you can(it's possible). not against nature- since it's rather neutral. doesn't perpetuate the species, but doesn't drive it to extinction(unless everyone changed, but this is impossible).
