Free Speech
FSA Ticket | Today | Join | Member | Search | Who's On | Help | Sign In | |
FSA > General > Political Discussion Go to subcategory:
Author Content
easyrider123
  • From:Norway

Date Posted:04-12-2018 06:51:08Copy HTML


Listeners need to think.............


THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable. Be honest and frank anyway.
Doe_Eyes Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #61
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 02:53:42Copy HTML

Each gender is programmed to be attracted to the OPPOSITE sex for the purposes of procreating for the species to survive.An attraction to the SAME sex would then be a defect in that programming. Each gender is biologically programmed for survival and procreation and to be attracted to the opposite sex for those purposes. A homosexual, male or female , is then by definition defective biologically as something is defective in the wiring of that person.A homosexual is acting against that biologically programmed attraction to the opposite sex.



If it is true that each gender is programmed to be attracted to the opposite sex for the purpose of procreation, by nature, what does nature do when the species is over populating?  Does nature change the nature of the species?  Or at least some, so as not to kill off the species with over population?  Biology may have programmed the species to "be fruitful and multiply" but at some point it is a threat to the species to continue to multiply, it becomes a threat for the species survival to over populate.  For all you know, homosexuals are the advanced members of the species, who are biologically programmed to NOT procreate, for the purpose of the species' survival, by checking population growth.  They are keeping the species in check, and thus, viable.  You should be GLAD there are homosexuals in this world, to prevent mankind from destroying himself by over population.  Next time, wales, maybe when you see a homosexual person, you should THANK them for being who they are, instead of being so angry that you are the neanderthal of the species and they, part of the future.  

The time is always right to do what is right.
PavlovsDog Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #62
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 02:54:43Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.


Unlike a Lie, the Truth requires no eloquence.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #63
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 04:51:55Copy HTML

Each gender is programmed to be attracted to the OPPOSITE sex for the purposes of procreating for the species to survive.An attraction to the SAME sex would then be a defect in that programming. Each gender is biologically programmed for survival and procreation and to be attracted to the opposite sex for those purposes. A homosexual, male or female , is then by definition defective biologically as something is defective in the wiring of that person.A homosexual is acting against that biologically programmed attraction to the opposite sex.



If it is true that each gender is programmed to be attracted to the opposite sex for the purpose of procreation, by nature, what does nature do when the species is over populating?  Does nature change the nature of the species?  Or at least some, so as not to kill off the species with over population?  Biology may have programmed the species to "be fruitful and multiply" but at some point it is a threat to the species to continue to multiply, it becomes a threat for the species survival to over populate.  For all you know, homosexuals are the advanced members of the species, who are biologically programmed to NOT procreate, for the purpose of the species' survival, by checking population growth.  They are keeping the species in check, and thus, viable.  You should be GLAD there are homosexuals in this world, to prevent mankind from destroying himself by over population.  Next time, wales, maybe when you see a homosexual person, you should THANK them for being who they are, instead of being so angry that you are the neanderthal of the species and they, part of the future.  


What a ridiculous presupposition. Nature does not handle , nor does it address, overpopulation and the "homosexual is here for overpopulation purposes" is another absurd and pathetic attempt to put forth nonsense in a weak justification for that which is an aberration. How ridiculous and stupid!

Next time you should actually just attempt to grow up and stop offering such RIDICULOUS nonsense!

wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #64
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 04:54:21Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?

PavlovsDog Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #65
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 05:41:40Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #66
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 06:07:43Copy HTML

Each gender is programmed to be attracted to the OPPOSITE sex for the purposes of procreating for the species to survive. An attraction to the SAME sex would then be a defect in that programming. Each gender is biologically programmed for survival and procreation and to be attracted to the opposite sex for those purposes. A homosexual, male or female , is then by definition defective biologically as something is defective in the wiring of that person.A homosexual is acting against that biologically programmed attraction to the opposite sex. ___ This is a major misunderstanding by much of the general public about evolution. That if an individual is not coded to reproduce then it must be a defect. Nonsense. Reproductive fitness is the goal on many levels as indicated above, but not just the individual level, also the community, population and species level. The post about "what does evolution do when there is overpopulation" is partly correct, but not entirely. A successful genome in a long-lived species is one that is huge with billions of gene combinations. Many of which are unused, serve no obvious purpose, or may even currently be detrimental or recessive. The combination of all these genes expressed results in random outcomes in phenotype. Sometimes these outcomes are not successful in terms of reproductive fitness, but the overall genome in the population is such that this is the way it is....in other words, has been necessary for our survival these past 6 million years since we looked a bit like chimps. The huge genome is important for the survival of the species in the long run, and can result in all sorts of individual expressions that don't necessarily function to have babies.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #67
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 06:55:43Copy HTML

Each gender is programmed to be attracted to the OPPOSITE sex for the purposes of procreating for the species to survive. An attraction to the SAME sex would then be a defect in that programming. Each gender is biologically programmed for survival and procreation and to be attracted to the opposite sex for those purposes. A homosexual, male or female , is then by definition defective biologically as something is defective in the wiring of that person.A homosexual is acting against that biologically programmed attraction to the opposite sex.

This is a major misunderstanding by much of the general public about evolution.  That if an individual is not coded to reproduce then it must be a defect.  Nonsense.  Reproductive fitness is the goal on many levels as indicated above, but not just the individual level, also the community, population and species level.  The post about "what does evolution do when there is overpopulation" is partly correct, but not entirely. A successful genome in a long-lived species is one that is huge with billions of gene combinations.  Many of which are unused, serve no obvious purpose, or may even currently be detrimental or recessive.  The combination of all these genes expressed results in random outcomes in phenotype.  Sometimes these outcomes are not successful in terms of reproductive fitness, but the overall genome in the population is such that this is the way it is....in other words, has been necessary for our survival these past 6 million years since we looked a bit like chimps.   The huge genome is important for the survival of the species in the long run, and can result in all sorts of individual expressions that don't necessarily function to have babies.



No it's NOT. reproductive fitness has nothing to do with ATTRACTION.  Two separate issues. IN FACT BECAUSE some may not be able to reprioduce is EXACTLY why each gender is programmed , NORMALLY, to be ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. If INDIVIDUAL people attempt to conceive and don't under this attraction, then the next one or the one after thnat will be successful at reproduction.

REPRODUCTION and ATTRACTION are TWO separate ISSUES. Each indiviidual does NOT have to reproduce BUT each individual has to be ATTRACTED to the OPPOSITE sex in order to boost the odds of SURVIVAL of the SPECIES, or for the POTENTIAL of REPRODUCING.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859

wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #68
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 06:58:42Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859

PavlovsDog Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #69
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:02:53Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859


 It's not nonsense. On the one hand you're insisting that we must follow nature's intent, then on the other hand you want to ignore natures intent. You are two faced, plain and simple.

wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #70
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:08:05Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859


 It's not nonsense. On the one hand you're insisting that we must follow nature's intent, then on the other hand you want to ignore natures intent. You are two faced, plain and simple.


Yes it, and YOUR, thinking are NONSENSE.

Reproductive fitness has nothing to do with ATTRACTION.  Two separate issues. IN FACT BECAUSE some may not be able to reprioduce is EXACTLY why each gender is programmed , NORMALLY, to be ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. If INDIVIDUAL people attempt to conceive and don't under this attraction, then the next one or the one after thnat will be successful at reproduction.

REPRODUCTION and ATTRACTION are TWO separate ISSUES. Each indiviidual does NOT have to reproduce BUT each individual has to be ATTRACTED to the OPPOSITE sex in order to boost the odds of SURVIVAL of the SPECIES.

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature,

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #71
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:11:11Copy HTML

"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply." —On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859 _____ So now you believe in evolution Wale? Quoting Charles Darwin. lol Check the date on that one Wale. 1859. Need I say more? We have learned a bit about genetics since 1859 Wale. Darwin had no idea what a gene was. Natural selection is only one avenue of species fitness. The genome and its adaptability is another. It is a fact that the fitness of a species is best attained by having a massive genome to combat future change. The result of the massive genome is phenotypic expressions in the population that apparently serve no useful purpose....but they are not always "a defect". An individual who physically cannot reproduce is no more defective than one who chooses not to reproduce. They are simply a result of the massive genome and billions of possible phenotypic outcomes of our genome that best promotes the overall survival of the species. The massive genome is what makes our species survive, not whether or not ONE INDIVIDUAL has heterosexual relations. I can post hundreds of studies of genetics to demonstrate this to you Wale....you would ignore them and stomp your feet and say "no it isn't" just like you always do. Likewise you can post nothing to support your view. Wale: Same idiot, different day.
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #72
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:12:20Copy HTML

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature, ___ It is a product of nature as I described above. Your acceptance of this reality is hardly necessary.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #73
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:15:01Copy HTML

"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply." —On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859

So now you believe in evolution Wale? Quoting Charles Darwin.  lol Check the date on that one Wale.  1859.  Need I say more?  We have learned a bit about genetics since 1859 Wale. Darwin had no idea what a gene was. Natural selection is only one avenue of species fitness.  The genome and its adaptability is another. It is a fact that the fitness of a species is best attained by having a massive genome to combat future change.  The result of the massive genome is phenotypic expressions in the population that apparently serve no useful purpose....but they are not always "a defect".  An individual who physically cannot reproduce is no more defective than one who chooses not to reproduce.  They are simply a result of the massive genome and billions of possible phenotypic outcomes of our genome that best promotes the overall survival of the species.  The massive genome is what makes our species survive, not whether or not ONE INDIVIDUAL has heterosexual relations. I can post hundreds of studies of genetics to demonstrate this to you Wale....you would ignore them and stomp your feet and say "no it isn't" just like you always do.  Likewise you can post nothing to support your view. Wale: Same idiot, different day.


Never said that, BUT YOU guys  ARE advocates of evolution and I am just pointing out the contradiction, in EVOLUTIONARY terms,

Yes you ARE the same idiot , different day DUMMY. If you are a proponent of evolution then you cannot be a supporter of homosexuality as it is in contradiction to evolutionary
purposes. Darwin ORIGINATED the THEORY of EVOLUTION and made an OBSERVATION ( an important STEP in the scientific process). SURVIVAL of THE SPECIES is CRUCIAL to the EVOLUTION THEORY.

PavlovsDog Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #74
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:23:48Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859


 It's not nonsense. On the one hand you're insisting that we must follow nature's intent, then on the other hand you want to ignore natures intent. You are two faced, plain and simple.


Yes it, and YOUR, thinking are NONSENSE.

Reproductive fitness has nothing to do with ATTRACTION.  Two separate issues. IN FACT BECAUSE some may not be able to reprioduce is EXACTLY why each gender is programmed , NORMALLY, to be ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. If INDIVIDUAL people attempt to conceive and don't under this attraction, then the next one or the one after thnat will be successful at reproduction.

REPRODUCTION and ATTRACTION are TWO separate ISSUES. Each indiviidual does NOT have to reproduce BUT each individual has to be ATTRACTED to the OPPOSITE sex in order to boost the odds of SURVIVAL of the SPECIES.

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature,


 No it's your two faced swalking that is nonsense.   You want to criticize one type of behavior because it contradicts your view nature's intent but then you wanna turn around and give another type of behavior a pass even though it also contradicts natures obvious intent. If nature wanted you to wear clothes then you would have been born wearing them. So stop being intellectually dishonest, and own your arguement. You want to have it both ways. You want to hold the homosexual accountable to natures intent when it suits your agenda but at the same time you want to ignore nature's intent when it's not in line with your own behavior. 


wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #75
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:25:04Copy HTML

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature,

It is a product of nature as I described above.  Your acceptance of this reality is hardly necessary.


Yes but just as the PEDOPHILE or the RAPIST is also a product of nature. They ALL exist BUT simply EXISTING is not the same as LEGITIMACY.

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #76
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:31:02Copy HTML

Wale, you are quite simply incorrect. This is not me saying this. This is the science of genetics saying this. I know you will want to make this about me as usual, but it has nothing to do with me. You are genetically retarded and you don't seem to want to know anything about it as well. A wide variety of phenotypic expression (the outcome of a genetic template), many with seemingly no evolutionary purpose, is due to our huge genome with billions of genes. This evolved as a long term evolutionary strategy for success in nearly every species. The vast genome with may expressions that seemingly serve no purpose....IS EXACTLY THE RESULT OF EVOLUTION and ENGINE OF EVOLUTION, not contradictory to it at all. Having this vast warehouse of combinations that species are constantly putting out there is how they survive the millennia of a changing environmental template. Having individual outcomes that deviate from the top of the bell curve is the expected outcome, not an abnormal outcome at all. I am not stating my opinion Wale. These are facts of genetics. Genetic variation resulting in myriads of outcomes, many not being individually successful, IS THE ENGINE OF EVOLUTION....not a mistake of evolution. Without what you call "mistakes", there would be no evolution.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #77
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:33:26Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859


 It's not nonsense. On the one hand you're insisting that we must follow nature's intent, then on the other hand you want to ignore natures intent. You are two faced, plain and simple.


Yes it, and YOUR, thinking are NONSENSE.

Reproductive fitness has nothing to do with ATTRACTION.  Two separate issues. IN FACT BECAUSE some may not be able to reprioduce is EXACTLY why each gender is programmed , NORMALLY, to be ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. If INDIVIDUAL people attempt to conceive and don't under this attraction, then the next one or the one after thnat will be successful at reproduction.

REPRODUCTION and ATTRACTION are TWO separate ISSUES. Each indiviidual does NOT have to reproduce BUT each individual has to be ATTRACTED to the OPPOSITE sex in order to boost the odds of SURVIVAL of the SPECIES.

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature,


 No it's your two faced swalking that is nonsense.   You want to criticize one type of behavior because it contradicts your view nature's intent but then you wanna turn around and give another type of behavior a pass even though it also contradicts natures obvious intent. If nature wanted you to wear clothes then you would have been born wearing them. So stop being intellectually dishonest, and own your arguement. You want to have it both ways. You want to hold the homosexual accountable to natures intent when it suits your agenda but at the same time you want to ignore nature's intent when it's not in line with your own behavior. 



You aren't THAT stupid in order to push your maladjusted thinking forward, are you? CLOTHES are necessary as a protection for ALL with NO distinguishing features. NATURE provided animals for MANY uses, among them for pelts so , IF I were you, I'd read abit more AND THINK before you write because YOUR writing BEFORE you THINK isn't working out too well for you!

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #78
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:35:01Copy HTML

Yes but just as the PEDOPHILE or the RAPIST is also a product of nature. They ALL exist BUT simply EXISTING is not the same as LEGITIMACY. ___ I have not heard of the genetic basis for pedophilia or rape. Oh that's right, because they don't exist. The main thing that makes these things illegitimate is not whether or not they have genetic basis, it is whether or not they cause harm to others. Homosexuality causes no harm to anyone, no harm to the species, nothing. Your analogy is therefore not one. You remain a moron as always. What does it feel like when virtually everyone you ever speak with in these forums gets around to recognizing your idiocy?
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #79
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:38:23Copy HTML

CLOTHES are necessary as a protection for ALL with NO distinguishing features. NATURE provided animals for MANY uses, among them for pelts so , IF I were you, I'd read abit more AND THINK before you write because YOUR writing BEFORE you THINK isn't working out too well for you! _____ Pav: By "read more", Wale means the bible. It tells you why animals are here to give us clothing. Clearly God failed to provide us with the appropriate biological outer covering (as did the hoax of evolution) so he needed to make up for it by giving us pelts. You really should think before you write. Look how well it works for Wale.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #80
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:39:56Copy HTML

Yes but just as the PEDOPHILE or the RAPIST is also a product of nature. They ALL exist BUT simply EXISTING is not the same as LEGITIMACY.

I have not heard of the genetic basis for pedophilia or rape.  Oh that's right, because they don't exist.  The main thing that makes these things illegitimate is not whether or not they have genetic basis, it is whether or not they cause harm to others.  Homosexuality causes no harm to anyone, no harm to the species, nothing. Your analogy is therefore not one.  You remain a moron as always.   What does it feel like when virtually everyone you ever speak with in these forums gets around to recognizing your idiocy?


THEY exist, just as the homosexual exists AND has psychological and emotional issues on top of the genetic malfunction. When HOMOSEXUALS AND their ADVOCATES push for SOCIETY to APPROVE, THAT is harming everyone by BLURRING distinctions between NORMAL and ABNORMAL.

PavlovsDog Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #81
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:42:22Copy HTML

CLOTHES are necessary as a protection for ALL with NO distinguishing features. NATURE provided animals for MANY uses, among them for pelts so , IF I were you, I'd read abit more AND THINK before you write because YOUR writing BEFORE you THINK isn't working out too well for you! _____ Pav:  By "read more", Wale means the bible.  It tells you why animals are here to give us clothing.  Clearly God failed to provide us with the appropriate biological outer covering (as did the hoax of evolution) so he needed to make up for it by giving us pelts. You really should think before you write. Look how well it works for Wale.


Yep Like I said...  All the anti homosexuality spew is born out of religious  fundamentalism. 

PavlovsDog Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #82
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:44:26Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859


 It's not nonsense. On the one hand you're insisting that we must follow nature's intent, then on the other hand you want to ignore natures intent. You are two faced, plain and simple.


Yes it, and YOUR, thinking are NONSENSE.

Reproductive fitness has nothing to do with ATTRACTION.  Two separate issues. IN FACT BECAUSE some may not be able to reprioduce is EXACTLY why each gender is programmed , NORMALLY, to be ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. If INDIVIDUAL people attempt to conceive and don't under this attraction, then the next one or the one after thnat will be successful at reproduction.

REPRODUCTION and ATTRACTION are TWO separate ISSUES. Each indiviidual does NOT have to reproduce BUT each individual has to be ATTRACTED to the OPPOSITE sex in order to boost the odds of SURVIVAL of the SPECIES.

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature,


 No it's your two faced swalking that is nonsense.   You want to criticize one type of behavior because it contradicts your view nature's intent but then you wanna turn around and give another type of behavior a pass even though it also contradicts natures obvious intent. If nature wanted you to wear clothes then you would have been born wearing them. So stop being intellectually dishonest, and own your arguement. You want to have it both ways. You want to hold the homosexual accountable to natures intent when it suits your agenda but at the same time you want to ignore nature's intent when it's not in line with your own behavior. 



You aren't THAT stupid in order to push your maladjusted thinking forward, are you? CLOTHES are necessary as a protection for ALL with NO distinguishing features. NATURE provided animals for MANY uses, among them for pelts so , IF I were you, I'd read abit more AND THINK before you write because YOUR writing BEFORE you THINK isn't working out too well for you!


So by believing that nature isn't my master I'm guilty of maladjusted thinking. You are full of shit.

wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #83
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:45:53Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859


 It's not nonsense. On the one hand you're insisting that we must follow nature's intent, then on the other hand you want to ignore natures intent. You are two faced, plain and simple.


Yes it, and YOUR, thinking are NONSENSE.

Reproductive fitness has nothing to do with ATTRACTION.  Two separate issues. IN FACT BECAUSE some may not be able to reprioduce is EXACTLY why each gender is programmed , NORMALLY, to be ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. If INDIVIDUAL people attempt to conceive and don't under this attraction, then the next one or the one after thnat will be successful at reproduction.

REPRODUCTION and ATTRACTION are TWO separate ISSUES. Each indiviidual does NOT have to reproduce BUT each individual has to be ATTRACTED to the OPPOSITE sex in order to boost the odds of SURVIVAL of the SPECIES.

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature,


 No it's your two faced swalking that is nonsense.   You want to criticize one type of behavior because it contradicts your view nature's intent but then you wanna turn around and give another type of behavior a pass even though it also contradicts natures obvious intent. If nature wanted you to wear clothes then you would have been born wearing them. So stop being intellectually dishonest, and own your arguement. You want to have it both ways. You want to hold the homosexual accountable to natures intent when it suits your agenda but at the same time you want to ignore nature's intent when it's not in line with your own behavior. 



You aren't THAT stupid in order to push your maladjusted thinking forward, are you? CLOTHES are necessary as a protection for ALL with NO distinguishing features. NATURE provided animals for MANY uses, among them for pelts so , IF I were you, I'd read abit more AND THINK before you write because YOUR writing BEFORE you THINK isn't working out too well for you!


So by believing that nature isn't my master I'm guilty of maladjusted thinking. You are full of shit.


Not at all, BUT failure to observe certain functions so OBVIOUS and pushing forwards with ideas contrary to what is obvious makes your ideas maladjusted, as well as your thinking.

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #84
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:47:32Copy HTML

THEY exist, just as the homosexual exists AND has psychological and emotional issues on top of the genetic malfunction. When HOMOSEXUALS AND their ADVOCATES push for SOCIETY to APPROVE, THAT is harming everyone by BLURRING distinctions between NORMAL and ABNORMAL. _______ What emotional and psychological issues? Because our country has fundamentalist moron assholes like you that hate gays is no mystery why they may have more emotional concerns. Blindness is a genetic "malfunction". They also suffer emotional issues more than the general population. Don't you fucking hate blind people? They suck. Abnormal bastards. What you didn't get about your examples is that pedophilia and rape causes harm to others. Blindness or homosexuality do not. Your analogy remains.....not an analogy at all. There is nothing defective about the continuum of sexual orientation in our species. There is however, something very defective with you. You are poison.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #85
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 07:54:30Copy HTML

THEY exist, just as the homosexual exists AND has psychological and emotional issues on top of the genetic malfunction. When HOMOSEXUALS AND their ADVOCATES push for SOCIETY to APPROVE, THAT is harming everyone by BLURRING distinctions between NORMAL and ABNORMAL.

What emotional and psychological issues?  Because our country has fundamentalist moron assholes like you that hate gays is no mystery why they may have more emotional concerns.  Blindness is a genetic "malfunction".  They also suffer emotional issues more than the general population.  Don't you fucking hate blind people?  They suck.  Abnormal bastards. What you didn't get about your examples is that pedophilia and rape causes harm to others.  Blindness or homosexuality do not.  Your analogy remains.....not an analogy at all. There is nothing defective about the continuum of sexual orientation in our species.  There is however, something very defective with you.  You are poison.


Simply because it is in opposition to your absurd poisition, that alone will not justify the unjustifiable. being homosexuals, they have psychological and emotional issues. Some extreme and overt and some hidden.

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #86
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 08:09:08Copy HTML

It is not my absurd position Wale. These are the facts of biology. Not my facts. The massive genome is the engine of evolution, and it results in all sorts of individual expressions that may seemingly serve no purpose to an idiot like yourself. You should probably write your own biology text since geneticists have this evolution thing all wrong and you have it all figured out.
easyrider123 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #87
  • From:Norway

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 08:17:24Copy HTML

Wale, you are quite simply incorrect.  This is not me saying this.  This is the science of genetics saying this.  I know you will want to make this about me as usual, but it has nothing to do with me.  You are genetically retarded and you don't seem to want to know anything about it as well. A wide variety of phenotypic expression (the outcome of a genetic template), many with seemingly no evolutionary purpose, is due to our huge genome with billions of genes.  This evolved as a long term evolutionary strategy for success in nearly every species.  The vast genome with may expressions that seemingly serve no purpose....IS EXACTLY THE RESULT OF EVOLUTION and ENGINE OF EVOLUTION, not contradictory to it at all.  Having this vast warehouse of combinations that species are constantly putting out there is how they survive the millennia of a changing environmental template.  Having individual outcomes that deviate from the top of the bell curve is the expected outcome, not an abnormal outcome at all. I am not stating my opinion Wale.  These are facts of genetics.  Genetic variation resulting in myriads of outcomes, many not being individually successful, IS THE ENGINE OF EVOLUTION....not a mistake of evolution.  Without what you call "mistakes", there would be no evolution.



Damn, I was looking forward to wale's response to this one in particular. I guess he has no answer, lol.


Thanks for posting it anyway, nice succinct telling of relevant facts.

PavlovsDog Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #88
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 08:21:44Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859


 It's not nonsense. On the one hand you're insisting that we must follow nature's intent, then on the other hand you want to ignore natures intent. You are two faced, plain and simple.


Yes it, and YOUR, thinking are NONSENSE.

Reproductive fitness has nothing to do with ATTRACTION.  Two separate issues. IN FACT BECAUSE some may not be able to reprioduce is EXACTLY why each gender is programmed , NORMALLY, to be ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. If INDIVIDUAL people attempt to conceive and don't under this attraction, then the next one or the one after thnat will be successful at reproduction.

REPRODUCTION and ATTRACTION are TWO separate ISSUES. Each indiviidual does NOT have to reproduce BUT each individual has to be ATTRACTED to the OPPOSITE sex in order to boost the odds of SURVIVAL of the SPECIES.

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature,


 No it's your two faced swalking that is nonsense.   You want to criticize one type of behavior because it contradicts your view nature's intent but then you wanna turn around and give another type of behavior a pass even though it also contradicts natures obvious intent. If nature wanted you to wear clothes then you would have been born wearing them. So stop being intellectually dishonest, and own your arguement. You want to have it both ways. You want to hold the homosexual accountable to natures intent when it suits your agenda but at the same time you want to ignore nature's intent when it's not in line with your own behavior. 



You aren't THAT stupid in order to push your maladjusted thinking forward, are you? CLOTHES are necessary as a protection for ALL with NO distinguishing features. NATURE provided animals for MANY uses, among them for pelts so , IF I were you, I'd read abit more AND THINK before you write because YOUR writing BEFORE you THINK isn't working out too well for you!


So by believing that nature isn't my master I'm guilty of maladjusted thinking. You are full of shit.


Not at all, BUT failure to observe certain functions so OBVIOUS and pushing forwards with ideas contrary to what is obvious makes your ideas maladjusted, as well as your thinking.


I didnt fail to observe anything, I'm just saying that any biological programing is immaterial when justifying or criticizing sexual behavior. If I want to engage in sexual intercourse for pleasure only, I dont care what nature's intent is. No more than I care what nature thinks when I put on my pants. You on the other hand are trying to have it both ways. You want to argue for nature's intent to criticize behavior when it suits you,  then ignore nature's intent when it disagrees with behavior you are engaging in. But I guess the two faced are incapable of owning their hypocrisy.

wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #89
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 09:10:19Copy HTML

I think all you blowhard natural law proponents need to shed your clothes and go about your lives as nature intended... butt naked.  That is, unless you wanna be a hypocrite.



Not at all. Is this your idiotic attempt at a rebuttal for what is obvious about the deviant dysfunction of homosexuality, meaning you cannot offer a swerious argument in FAVOR of , other than that which originates from your irrational thoughts?


So basically you think you can cherry pick which of nature's intents you must subscribe to. I say if you are going to condemn  behavior because it's in contradiction to what you think natures intent is, then you must do so for all of nature's intents... not just when it suits your anti homosexuality agenda. Your clothes are unnatural, so get rid of them if you are ruled by nature's intent.


AGAIN, nonsense argument as EVERYONE has to have clothes for protection of many forms. BIOLOGICAL programming is as it is and yet YOU even want to DENY the REALITY of that. ABSURD thinking will not JUSTIFY dysfunctuional and deviant behavior.



"Each organic being is striving to increase in a geometrical ratio . . . each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life and to suffer great destruction . . . The vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply."
—On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, 1859


 It's not nonsense. On the one hand you're insisting that we must follow nature's intent, then on the other hand you want to ignore natures intent. You are two faced, plain and simple.


Yes it, and YOUR, thinking are NONSENSE.

Reproductive fitness has nothing to do with ATTRACTION.  Two separate issues. IN FACT BECAUSE some may not be able to reprioduce is EXACTLY why each gender is programmed , NORMALLY, to be ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. If INDIVIDUAL people attempt to conceive and don't under this attraction, then the next one or the one after thnat will be successful at reproduction.

REPRODUCTION and ATTRACTION are TWO separate ISSUES. Each indiviidual does NOT have to reproduce BUT each individual has to be ATTRACTED to the OPPOSITE sex in order to boost the odds of SURVIVAL of the SPECIES.

The homosexual is an anomaly of nature,


 No it's your two faced swalking that is nonsense.   You want to criticize one type of behavior because it contradicts your view nature's intent but then you wanna turn around and give another type of behavior a pass even though it also contradicts natures obvious intent. If nature wanted you to wear clothes then you would have been born wearing them. So stop being intellectually dishonest, and own your arguement. You want to have it both ways. You want to hold the homosexual accountable to natures intent when it suits your agenda but at the same time you want to ignore nature's intent when it's not in line with your own behavior. 



You aren't THAT stupid in order to push your maladjusted thinking forward, are you? CLOTHES are necessary as a protection for ALL with NO distinguishing features. NATURE provided animals for MANY uses, among them for pelts so , IF I were you, I'd read abit more AND THINK before you write because YOUR writing BEFORE you THINK isn't working out too well for you!


So by believing that nature isn't my master I'm guilty of maladjusted thinking. You are full of shit.


Not at all, BUT failure to observe certain functions so OBVIOUS and pushing forwards with ideas contrary to what is obvious makes your ideas maladjusted, as well as your thinking.


I didnt fail to observe anything, I'm just saying that any biological programing is immaterial when justifying or criticizing sexual behavior. If I want to engage in sexual intercourse for pleasure only, I dont care what nature's intent is. No more than I care what nature thinks when I put on my pants. You on the other hand are trying to have it both ways. You want to argue for nature's intent to criticize behavior when it suits you,  then ignore nature's intent when it disagrees with behavior you are engaging in. But I guess the two faced are incapable of owning their hypocrisy.


I was stating a biological purpose for Men And women being wired to be attracted to each other as NORMAL. That is ONE reason of several. Once again having sex for pleasure is something else; however, if one is having sex or just  ATTRACTED to the same sex, then THAT is abnomal, not nornal or ANYTHING on that side of it. Now, justify your reaosns as to why homosexuality is legitimate . No hypocrisy here.

wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #90
  • From:USA

Re:"I'm Gay"............. so what? if I am or not? Time to Grow Up!

Date Posted:06-12-2018 09:15:47Copy HTML

Wale, you are quite simply incorrect.  This is not me saying this.  This is the science of genetics saying this.  I know you will want to make this about me as usual, but it has nothing to do with me.  You are genetically retarded and you don't seem to want to know anything about it as well. A wide variety of phenotypic expression (the outcome of a genetic template), many with seemingly no evolutionary purpose, is due to our huge genome with billions of genes.  This evolved as a long term evolutionary strategy for success in nearly every species.  The vast genome with may expressions that seemingly serve no purpose....IS EXACTLY THE RESULT OF EVOLUTION and ENGINE OF EVOLUTION, not contradictory to it at all.  Having this vast warehouse of combinations that species are constantly putting out there is how they survive the millennia of a changing environmental template.  Having individual outcomes that deviate from the top of the bell curve is the expected outcome, not an abnormal outcome at all. I am not stating my opinion Wale.  These are facts of genetics.  Genetic variation resulting in myriads of outcomes, many not being individually successful, IS THE ENGINE OF EVOLUTION....not a mistake of evolution.  Without what you call "mistakes", there would be no evolution.



Damn, I was looking forward to wale's response to this one in particular. I guess he has no answer, lol.


Thanks for posting it anyway, nice succinct telling of relevant facts.


YOU can have it SLEE ZEE. Evolution, as it's base has the principle of Survival of the Species , and DUMMY's nonsense not withstanding, it remains as an underklying principle. in order to do that, the species MUST have those of the opposite sex ATTRACTED to each other in order to have the SPECIES (HUMANS) survive; THERFORE, each individual is CORRECTLY wied/programmed/ whatever for that purpose and those individuals who are wired with an attraction for each other have been born with a defect in that wiring. What escapes you? WITHOUT THE ATTRACTION built in normally, there is NO "evolution'

Copyright © 2000-2018 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.