Why is homosexuality "wrong"

[General Ludd]

There is absolutely nothing unnatural about homosexuality, it is common place in nature and exists in many different species of animals - particularily amongst the animals considered to be the most intelligent and complex.

If the only type of sex which is deemed to be 'natural' is that which is for reproduction, then most heterosexual sex is also, by that definition, unnatural.

[Arrian]

I have no problem w/it. Why should I? Go for it, though I don't really wanna hear the play-by-play.

I find the large percentage of people who condemn (to one degree or another) homosexuality vaguely amusing. Some aren't amusing at all - those that are particularly rabid about it. But most are just funny because of their screwy logic.

I can't decide if Luk is scary or hilarious.

-Arrian

[FemmeAdonis]

- particularily amongst the animals considered to be the most intelligent and complex.

apparently HUMANS aren't included in that list of "animals" huh?

[Boris Godunov]

I don't get the "It's unnatural" or "it's not what was intended" arguments.

It is clearly natural, as it has been observed in all mammalian land species. It may be rare, but just because something is rare doesn't make it unnatural. For me, I assure you it is perfectly natural. Heterosexual sex does not come to me naturally, however. I don't think you people really know what "natural" means. You're confusing natural and unnatural with common and uncommon.

As for "intended"--nature doesn't have "intent," it just is. Nature has no more intent than a tornado does.

There are plenty of theories that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon that has become a part of evolution, anyway. I read one study where it showed how in human and animal populations, times of great stress upon the population tended to be followed by periods of an upsurge in homosexuality. For example, there seemed to be an unusually large numbers of gays in Germany in the decades following WWII, particularly in the areas hardest hit during the war. It's also been noticed in animal populations when there is overpopulation that there is a rise in homosexual behavior, perhaps as a natural response to the overcrowded conditions. I suppose the thrust of the theory is that nature compensates for overpopulated conditions by triggering higher incidents of homosexuals, perhaps through the mother (i.e. being under stress during pregnancy may be part of the cause).

It's an interesting theory, at least.

Regardless, I don't think those who say "It's perveted, unnatural, makes me sick, etc....but there's nothing wrong with it, just keep it to yourself" realize how hypocritical and hurtful such a thing is. It comes across as very disingenuous.

I find akin to saying "all Black people are lazy, dirty, thieving, stupid drug users...but it's o.k. to be Black, just as long as you stay away from me."

[Simon Darkshade]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Says the man who doesn't get any

No, actually the man who goes out of his way to avoid ever having any. It is a common jibe, that one is critical of sexual relations because one "cannot get any", but it is more a case of detesting the very thought of such activity, and not being involved as a result.
And the jibes are about as effective as being headbutted by an anorexic butterfly who is flying against the wind.

[Solly]

Animals can behave unnaturally as well.

[JohnIII]

Like Cardiff fans.

[loinburger]

I'm part of the "whatever floats your boat, just don't tell me about it" group, but to be fair I'm the same way with my heterosexual friends. I don't really want to know what the skank they picked up at the bar let them do--people ought to have a bit of discretion about what is and isn't "private". If a heterosexual/homosexual friend says "I had sex last night," then fine. If they start giving anatomical details, then I cut them off, regardless of their sexual preference.

[Boris Godunov]

I'm just wondering what it is that makes people think homosexuals are any more likely than heterosexuals to inappropriately discuss the details of their sexual activities. I, for one, have always been the don't-kiss-and-tell type, and get squeamish whenever anyone gives details of their activities.

But I think some of the folks here are also talking about such innocuous activities as hand-holding, kissing in public, etc. Saying those aren't acceptable for gays--when they are perfectly fine for heterosexuals--is a simple double-standard and is not fair. That's saying "you shouldn't be gay in public." Well, guess what? I'm gay no matter where I am, and it's not my responsibility to alter that behavior to appease the childish squeamishness of people whom it bothers.

[moomin]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I'm just wondering what it is that makes people think homosexuals are any more likely than heterosexuals to inappropriately discuss the details of their sexual activities.

Perhaps it's the in-your-face jockstap & leather parades, Boris.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
But I think some of the folks here are also talking about such innocuous activities as hand-holding, kissing in public, etc.

I do a double-take when I see PDA's from homosexuals, but that's just because I'm not really used to seeing them (while I am used to seeing PDA's from heterosexuals).

[Bereta_Eder]

Gays, not gays, just people going on about their business

Ont hing that's rather annoying though is that sometimes everything gets turned to being about homosexuality.

This happened a lot with Mr. Fun and a bit with Boris as well.

But both have grown out of it now and that's an improvement

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by moominparatrooper
Perhaps it's the in-your-face jockstap & leather parades, Boris.

How about those in-your-face, breast-bearing and penis-showing heterosexuals at Mardi Gras parades?

I think it's pretty even-handed.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by paiktis22
This happened a lot with Mr. Fun and a bit with Boris as well.

The vast majority of my posts have always been unrelated to my sexuality. I don't think I've ever discussed the subject seriously except in the context of it being first brought up by someone else... kinda like this thread!

[Solly]

Yeah, there was a time when any thread that MrFun posted in would immediately turn into one about some aspect of homosexuality.