Sex, Science, Reporduction And Orentation

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Snow@Mar 4 2005, 11:19 PM

Warning: This is what happens to people who fixate on other people's sexuality:

Well I at least know what my problem is ~ LOL I just thought I was getting old.

[Amillia]

Hey here is a scripture I just found today:

Lev. 20:

13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

The reason I am so surprised that I found this is because I have been told by Gays that there was no such scripture.

[pushka]

http://www.truluck.com/html/six_bible_pass...#Leviticus18:22

Please refer to the above link and scroll down to the scripture you are discussing...it states that it was not referring to homosexuals but to hetrosexuals taking part in baal fertility rituals.

The whole article is interesting, including a number of the passages from the bible which are quoted/used against homosexuals.

[Traveler]

Originally posted by Snow+Mar 4 2005, 10:14 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Mar 4 2005, 10:14 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Traveler@Mar 4 2005, 11:29 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Mar 3 2005, 10:38 PM

Why are you so obsessed with what other people do with their genitals?

You may feel my post in response to fals claims concerning homosexuality an obsession. Why is it more important to you to label obsessions rather than identify the truth verses errors on this subject?

My concern is that if the lies are told often enough and the truth shut out the lies will become believed and an generation will be lost. For example is homosexuality genetic because the brains of homosexuals are different? Does science support this notion? - yet I do not see you accusing the person that presented this as scientific fact, as being obsessed with homosexuality - Why?

Why are you obsessed with only calling calling those that oppose homosexuality as being obsessed with it?

The Traveler

[Lindy]

Originally posted by Amillia+Mar 3 2005, 11:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Mar 3 2005, 11:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--sgallan@Mar 4 2005, 12:18 AM

Threaten to hurt one of my close friends, or especially family, and be ready to fight to the death. Really. Heck, I had my wife tossed in jail to protect my kid. And I love her..... a lot.  I am capable. 

That sounds hard. You must be a very strong (inside and out) kind of guy.

It's called Tough Love..... and it is hard.... ....but sometimes drastic measures must be taken. I also have taken drastic measures when it was needed, as hard as it was....it had to be done. I empathize with any parent, spouse or friend who had to take care of business to protect anyone they care about. You did what you had to do Scott, I hope it helped her.

[Lindy]

My two cents:

Something I read last night in the NT:

Jude 1: 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. (Bold lettering is my doing)

And before anyone can comment..... it says FLESH.....not fur or wool

[Amillia]

Originally posted by pushka@Mar 7 2005, 12:16 PM

http://www.truluck.com/html/six_bible_pass...#Leviticus18:22

Please refer to the above link and scroll down to the scripture you are discussing...it states that it was not referring to homosexuals but to hetrosexuals taking part in baal fertility rituals.

The whole article is interesting, including a number of the passages from the bible which are quoted/used against homosexuals.

Everyone can turn it into what they want, but the preachers, who btw study the historical ends of the bible backwards and forwards, are the ones I got this scripture from in the context of homosexuality.

This link has to be written by a homosexual apologist, right?

[Snow]

Originally posted by Traveler@Mar 7 2005, 04:09 PM

You may feel my post in response to fals claims concerning homosexuality an obsession.  Why is it more important to you to label obsessions rather than identify the truth verses errors on this subject?

My concern is that if the lies are told often enough and the truth shut out the lies will become believed and an generation will be lost.  For example is homosexuality genetic because the brains of homosexuals are different?  Does science support this notion? - yet I do not see you accusing the person that presented this as scientific fact, as being obsessed with homosexuality - Why?

Why are you obsessed with only calling calling those that oppose homosexuality as being obsessed with it?

The Traveler

Cuz when Mormons obsess over what other other people do with their genital, and where they choose to place them, it makes the whole durned lot of us look like paranoid idiots and I am tired my dear brothers and sisters who are also imprisoned in the faith make us look like tweaked puftahs.

It's like the asinine anti-Mormon evangelicals who instead of proudly preaching their own message of hope, choose to create an "other" (us the Mormons) and then condemn us. Mormonism, on the other and superior hand, don't usually dump on an "other" but rather preach our our positive message.... except for when the paranoids start dumping on gays. If you think heterosexuality is so hot, then tout it and stop braying at the gays.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Snow@Mar 8 2005, 07:13 PM

puftahs.

Ooooooo! Another new word! (is it like the Stay Puff Marshmallow man?)

[Snow]

Originally posted by curvette+Mar 8 2005, 07:06 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Mar 8 2005, 07:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Mar 8 2005, 07:13 PM

puftahs.

Ooooooo! Another new word! (is it like the Stay Puff Marshmallow man?)

Second Bruce

Goodday, Bruce!

First Bruce

Oh, Hello Bruce!

Third Bruce

How are yer Bruce?

First Bruce

Bit crook, Bruce.

Second Bruce

Where's Bruce?

First Bruce

He's not here, Bruce.

Third Bruce

Blimey, s'hot in here, Bruce.

First Bruce

S'hot enough to boil a monkey's bum!

Second Bruce

That's a strange expression, Bruce.

First Bruce

Well Bruce, I heard the Prime Minister use it. S'hot enough to boil a monkey's bum in 'ere, your Majesty,' he said and she smiled quietly to herself.

Third Bruce

She's a good Sheila, Bruce and not at all stuck up.

Second Bruce

Ah, here comes the Bossfella now! - how are you, Bruce?

Enter fourth Bruce with English person, Michael

Fourth Bruce

Goodday, Bruce, Hello Bruce, how are you, Bruce? Gentlemen, I'd like to introduce a chap from pommie land... who'll be joining us this year here in the Philosophy Department of the University of Woolamaloo.

All

Goodday.

Fourth Bruce

Michael Baldwin - this is Bruce. Michael Baldwin - this is Bruce. Michael Baldwin - this is Bruce.

First Bruce

Is your name not Bruce, then?

Michael

No, it's Michael.

Second Bruce

That's going to cause a little confusion.

Third Bruce

Mind if we call you 'Bruce' to keep it clear?

Fourth Bruce

Well, Gentlemen, I think we'd better start the meeting. Before we start, though, I'll ask the padre for a prayer.

First Bruce snaps a plastic dog-collar round his neck. They all lower their heads.

First Bruce

Oh Lord, we beseech thee, have mercy on our faculty, Amen!!

All

Amen!

Fourth Bruce

Crack the tubes, right! (Third Bruce starts opening beer cans) Er, Bruce, I now call upon you to welcome Mr. Baldwin to the Philosophy Department.

Second Bruce

I'd like to welcome the pommy ###### to God's own earth, and I'd like to remind him that we don't like stuck-up sticky-beaks here.

All

Hear, hear! Well spoken, Bruce!

Fourth Bruce

Now, Bruce teaches classical philosophy, Bruce teaches Haegelian philosophy, and Bruce here teaches logical positivism, and is also in charge of the sheepdip.

Third Bruce

What's does new Bruce teach?

Fourth Bruce

New Bruce will be teaching political science - Machiavelli, Bentham, Locke, Hobbes, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Lindwall, Miller, Hassett, and Benet.

Second Bruce

Those are cricketers, Bruce!

Fourth Bruce

Oh, spit!

Third Bruce

Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce!

Fourth Bruce

In addition, as he's going to be teaching politics, I've told him he's welcome to teach any of the great socialist thinkers, provided he makes it clear that they were wrong.

They all stand up.

All

Australia, Australia, Australia, Australia, we love you. Amen!

They sit down.

Fourth Bruce

Any questions?

Second Bruce

New Bruce - are you a pooftah?

Fourth Bruce

Are you a pooftah?

Michael

No!

Fourth Bruce

No right, well gentlemen, I'll just remind you of the faculty rules: Rule one - no pooftahs. Rule two, no member of the faculty is to maltreat the Abbos in any way whatsoever - if there's anybody watching. Rule three - no pooftahs. Rule four - I don't want to catch anyone not drinking in their room after lights out. Rule five - no pooftahs. Rule six - there is no rule six! Rule seven - no pooftahs. That concludes the reading of the rules, Bruce.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Snow+Mar 8 2005, 10:06 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Mar 8 2005, 10:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Mar 8 2005, 07:06 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Mar 8 2005, 07:13 PM

puftahs.

Ooooooo! Another new word! (is it like the Stay Puff Marshmallow man?)

Second Bruce

Goodday, Bruce!

First Bruce

Oh, Hello Bruce!

Third Bruce

How are yer Bruce?

First Bruce

Bit crook, Bruce.

Second Bruce

Where's Bruce?

First Bruce

He's not here, Bruce.

Third Bruce

Blimey, s'hot in here, Bruce.

First Bruce

S'hot enough to boil a monkey's bum!

Second Bruce

That's a strange expression, Bruce.

First Bruce

Well Bruce, I heard the Prime Minister use it. S'hot enough to boil a monkey's bum in 'ere, your Majesty,' he said and she smiled quietly to herself.

Third Bruce

She's a good Sheila, Bruce and not at all stuck up.

Second Bruce

Ah, here comes the Bossfella now! - how are you, Bruce?

Enter fourth Bruce with English person, Michael

Fourth Bruce

Goodday, Bruce, Hello Bruce, how are you, Bruce? Gentlemen, I'd like to introduce a chap from pommie land... who'll be joining us this year here in the Philosophy Department of the University of Woolamaloo.

All

Goodday.

Fourth Bruce

Michael Baldwin - this is Bruce. Michael Baldwin - this is Bruce. Michael Baldwin - this is Bruce.

First Bruce

Is your name not Bruce, then?

Michael

No, it's Michael.

Second Bruce

That's going to cause a little confusion.

Third Bruce

Mind if we call you 'Bruce' to keep it clear?

Fourth Bruce

Well, Gentlemen, I think we'd better start the meeting. Before we start, though, I'll ask the padre for a prayer.

First Bruce snaps a plastic dog-collar round his neck. They all lower their heads.

First Bruce

Oh Lord, we beseech thee, have mercy on our faculty, Amen!!

All

Amen!

Fourth Bruce

Crack the tubes, right! (Third Bruce starts opening beer cans) Er, Bruce, I now call upon you to welcome Mr. Baldwin to the Philosophy Department.

Second Bruce

I'd like to welcome the pommy ###### to God's own earth, and I'd like to remind him that we don't like stuck-up sticky-beaks here.

All

Hear, hear! Well spoken, Bruce!

Fourth Bruce

Now, Bruce teaches classical philosophy, Bruce teaches Haegelian philosophy, and Bruce here teaches logical positivism, and is also in charge of the sheepdip.

Third Bruce

What's does new Bruce teach?

Fourth Bruce

New Bruce will be teaching political science - Machiavelli, Bentham, Locke, Hobbes, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Lindwall, Miller, Hassett, and Benet.

Second Bruce

Those are cricketers, Bruce!

Fourth Bruce

Oh, spit!

Third Bruce

Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce!

Fourth Bruce

In addition, as he's going to be teaching politics, I've told him he's welcome to teach any of the great socialist thinkers, provided he makes it clear that they were wrong.

They all stand up.

All

Australia, Australia, Australia, Australia, we love you. Amen!

They sit down.

Fourth Bruce

Any questions?

Second Bruce

New Bruce - are you a pooftah?

Fourth Bruce

Are you a pooftah?

Michael

No!

Fourth Bruce

No right, well gentlemen, I'll just remind you of the faculty rules: Rule one - no pooftahs. Rule two, no member of the faculty is to maltreat the Abbos in any way whatsoever - if there's anybody watching. Rule three - no pooftahs. Rule four - I don't want to catch anyone not drinking in their room after lights out. Rule five - no pooftahs. Rule six - there is no rule six! Rule seven - no pooftahs. That concludes the reading of the rules, Bruce.

Boy you sure know how to turn a body off from reading.

[pushka]

Awww...was that not Monty Python at its best, Snow? Wonderful stuff...thanks!

[DisRuptive1]

Can we refrain from quoting abnormally large amounts of wording?

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Snow@Mar 8 2005, 09:06 PM

Second Bruce

New Bruce - are you a pooftah?

Fourth Bruce

Are you a pooftah?

Michael

No!

Fourth Bruce

No right, well gentlemen, I'll just remind you of the faculty rules: Rule one - no pooftahs. Rule two, no member of the faculty is to maltreat the Abbos in any way whatsoever - if there's anybody watching. Rule three - no pooftahs. Rule four - I don't want to catch anyone not drinking in their room after lights out. Rule five - no pooftahs. Rule six - there is no rule six! Rule seven - no pooftahs. That concludes the reading of the rules, Bruce.

Okay. So a Pooftah is a male homosexual. What is a puftah?

[Snow]

Originally posted by curvette@Mar 9 2005, 06:47 PM

Okay. So a Pooftah is a male homosexual. What is a puftah?

A pooftah is an English male homosexual. A puftah is an Americanized homosexual - Bless the Queen, she's a good Shiela and not a bit stuck up either.

[Cal]

The Traveler

I am concerned with the deteriorating relationship between society and its support of the core family (loving father and mother) as a necessary institution for the preservation of society.

YOur post starts out with an unproven, and perhaps, unexamined assumption.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Snow+Mar 8 2005, 07:13 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Mar 8 2005, 07:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Traveler@Mar 7 2005, 04:09 PM

You may feel my post in response to fals claims concerning homosexuality an obsession.  Why is it more important to you to label obsessions rather than identify the truth verses errors on this subject?

My concern is that if the lies are told often enough and the truth shut out the lies will become believed and an generation will be lost.  For example is homosexuality genetic because the brains of homosexuals are different?  Does science support this notion? - yet I do not see you accusing the person that presented this as scientific fact, as being obsessed with homosexuality - Why?

Why are you obsessed with only calling calling those that oppose homosexuality as being obsessed with it?

The Traveler

Cuz when Mormons obsess over what other other people do with their genital, and where they choose to place them, it makes the whole durned lot of us look like paranoid idiots and I am tired my dear brothers and sisters who are also imprisoned in the faith make us look like tweaked puftahs.

It's like the asinine anti-Mormon evangelicals who instead of proudly preaching their own message of hope, choose to create an "other" (us the Mormons) and then condemn us. Mormonism, on the other and superior hand, don't usually dump on an "other" but rather preach our our positive message.... except for when the paranoids start dumping on gays. If you think heterosexuality is so hot, then tout it and stop braying at the gays.

Snow--we seem to be agreeing on too many things lately, this has got to stop!

[Traveler]

Originally posted by Cal@Mar 13 2005, 01:37 PM

The Traveler

I am concerned with the deteriorating relationship between society and its support of the core family (loving father and mother) as a necessary institution for the preservation of society.

YOur post starts out with an unproven, and perhaps, unexamined assumption.

Like your insistance that homosexual's have different brains because of genetics?

Your views of what is scientific and proven, unexamined assumptions are without merrit.

The Traveler

[Guest bizabra]

Originally posted by Traveler+Mar 4 2005, 12:22 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Traveler @ Mar 4 2005, 12:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Mar 3 2005, 06:38 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Traveler@Mar 2 2005, 06:39 PM

Society can exist and thrive without any homosexuality.  I am sorry if this truth offends anyone.  I am sorry so many cannot accept this truth.

I have felt this way for some time about brunettes. We can exist and thrive perfectly fine without them. So what's the deal? Why are they still around?

You have taken my point out of context. Perhaps it was my fault in not expressing it correctly. Men and women involved in reproduction are necessary for society to survive. There is reason and need for a man and a woman to reproduce. Therefore society has reason and need to support marriage of a man and woman in marriage. The point is that there is no correspondent need for homosexuality.

There is need for genetic diversity - I disagree with the implication that genetic diversity likewise serves no purpose. This is the problem I have with apologist of homosexuality – they give untrue arguments. In essence they lie about what homosexuality is and make comparisons that are in every way false and do not apply. This troubles me. Convince my skepticism with truth please.

We are talking about cognitive activity. What I am suggesting is that the cognitive activity of homosexuals not be recognized in the same manner as the cognitive activity from which society is rewarded with another generation.

Now if we are going to argue over the notion of give us what we want because we want it and need not reason or logic – that is another approach but I am not so convinced. Mankind has created some of it’s greatest blunders with this approach to logic and reason.

The Traveler

Well, then no one who cannot have children can't marry or hook up. Everyone must pass a physical exam designed to test their fertility before they can be issued a marriage license. Marriage is for having babies and raising families . PERIOD! NO one else can be allowed to have life partners, or fall in love, etc. because MARRIAGE IS FOR HAVING BABIES ONLY!

Sounds stupid, doesn't it? Yet it is exactly your argument, you silly!

[pushka]

Good point Bizabra!

[Cal]

The Traveler

I am concerned with the deteriorating relationship between society and its support of the core family (loving father and mother) as a necessary institution for the preservation of society.

YOur post starts out with an unproven, and perhaps, unexamined assumption.

Like your insistance that homosexual's have different brains because of genetics?

Your views of what is scientific and proven, unexamined assumptions are without merrit.

The Traveler

Trav--your unproven assumption is that a society can only function based on your idea of the nuclear family. As a matter of fact there are lots of societies that have functioned very well with very different arrangements. Do some sociological studying about a native peoples of the south pacific, for one example.

YOu need to look outside your own little world of realities and see that humans can function in a variety of social and familiar arrangements.

[Traveler]

Originally posted by Cal@Mar 17 2005, 07:04 PM

The Traveler

I am concerned with the deteriorating relationship between society and its support of the core family (loving father and mother) as a necessary institution for the preservation of society.

YOur post starts out with an unproven, and perhaps, unexamined assumption.

Like your insistance that homosexual's have different brains because of genetics?

Your views of what is scientific and proven, unexamined assumptions are without merrit.

The Traveler

Trav--your unproven assumption is that a society can only function based on your idea of the nuclear family. As a matter of fact there are lots of societies that have functioned very well with very different arrangements. Do some sociological studying about a native peoples of the south pacific, for one example.

YOu need to look outside your own little world of realities and see that humans can function in a variety of social and familiar arrangements.

I would be glad to consider something outside my little world but you refuse to give any reason or justification; that is an essential part of reason – the reason. The lack of reason is on your part with the assumption that homosexuality is needed or necessary or a benefit. I am still trying to connect to some reason. The truth is that it is not needed it is not necessary and there is no benefit. The truth is that it is a cognitive behavior. The truth is that cognitive behavior is a product of learning in an environment. Do you understand what cognitive response is?

You want me to consider homosexuality, why? Just because you have an opinion about something is not a reason for everyone else to fall in line. Especiall if you have no reasonable reason. Have you not implied at other times, that blind acceptance of things is not an intelligent response? Lets be clear. I could care less what someone does in private and in secret, thaw they do and not tell is their business; but what some people proclaim in public is public business.

And if they say something is scientific, and has reason and is needed they should be ready to give reason. All I ask is that if you support something you give clear reason before you expect others to agree.

I gave sound scientific studies that blew holes in you junk science. Homosexuality is cognitive, it is not instinctive nor is it genetic. If I have misrepresented scientific studies of cognition then correct me. In the mean time, please try to get a grip on reality my friend. I do not care that you are for homosexuality – just that you lie to support it. Also you say I need to consider something outside my little world. Two responses. 1. Why do I need to consider something outside my world? Because that is you unsupported opinion? 2. You need to understand that your arguments and science do not hold up anywhere – even in your little world. Homosexuality is not genetic it is not instinctive - it is cognitive.

The Traveler

[Cal]

[

QUOTE=Traveler,Mar 21 2005, 02:52 PM]

The Traveler

I am concerned with the deteriorating relationship between society and its support of the core family (loving father and mother) as a necessary institution for the preservation of society.

YOur post starts out with an unproven, and perhaps, unexamined assumption.

Like your insistance that homosexual's have different brains because of genetics?

Your views of what is scientific and proven, unexamined assumptions are without merrit.

The Traveler

Trav--your unproven assumption is that a society can only function based on your idea of the nuclear family. As a matter of fact there are lots of societies that have functioned very well with very different arrangements. Do some sociological studying about a native peoples of the south pacific, for one example.

YOu need to look outside your own little world of realities and see that humans can function in a variety of social and familiar arrangements.

I would be glad to consider something outside my little world but you refuse to give any reason or justification; that is an essential part of reason – the reason. The lack of reason is on your part with the assumption that homosexuality is needed or necessary or a benefit. I am still trying to connect to some reason. The truth is that it is not needed it is not necessary and there is no benefit. The truth is that it is a cognitive behavior. The truth is that cognitive behavior is a product of learning in an environment. Do you understand what cognitive response is?

You want me to consider homosexuality, why? Just because you have an opinion about something is not a reason for everyone else to fall in line. Especiall if you have no reasonable reason. Have you not implied at other times, that blind acceptance of things is not an intelligent response? Lets be clear. I could care less what someone does in private and in secret, thaw they do and not tell is their business; but what some people proclaim in public is public business.

And if they say something is scientific, and has reason and is needed they should be ready to give reason. All I ask is that if you support something you give clear reason before you expect others to agree.

I gave sound scientific studies that blew holes in you junk science. Homosexuality is cognitive, it is not instinctive nor is it genetic. If I have misrepresented scientific studies of cognition then correct me. In the mean time, please try to get a grip on reality my friend. I do not care that you are for homosexuality – just that you lie to support it. Also you say I need to consider something outside my little world. Two responses. 1. Why do I need to consider something outside my world? Because that is you unsupported opinion? 2. You need to understand that your arguments and science do not hold up anywhere – even in your little world. Homosexuality is not genetic it is not instinctive - it is cognitive.

The Traveler

I've already given the scientific evidence for the genetic influence in homosexuality, and you have chosen to ignore it. A quick recap for the scientifically handicapped:

1) Minnesota and Australian Twin studies. (Highly respected sociological studies of identical twins separated at birth, raised in totally different environments--show a 50% correlation on a host of characteristics previously thought to be totally environmentally determined--including homosexuality)

2)Post mortum brain studies of homosexual brain anatomy. (Homosexual brains contain anatomical structures characteristic of the opposite sex)--Are you suggesting that brain structure is environmental?

3) Couple those with extensive interviews with gay people that documents that most of them knew they were gay from as long as they can remember.

Look them up, read them and then tell me that is "junk" science.

Sorry friend, but, it is you that is operating on opinion and prejudice, not me.