Hey, homosexuality is only natural
According to Barack Obama, the United States is not a Christian nation, yet we are a Muslim “country.” In fact, many on the left would tell you that our founding fathers wanted to keep religion out of our government completely. That, my friends, is a different discussion for different day. But, what if we discount Christian morality? What, then, do we use to gauge right and wrong? Many would say that we only have to turn to nature and observe what the animals do. Hence, right and wrong should be defined, not by what is moral, but what is natural.
Homosexuality is natural. Take a look at penguins, and you will quickly see that homosexual couples are perfectly normal. Some gay penguin couples even pretend that rocks are eggs. Isn’t that sweet? Yes, modern society frowns upon the act of homosexuality, but nature is nature. So, how then can one disagree with human homosexuality when it has been documented in nature? I guess, you can’t. One can only apologize for being so closed-minded. I feel stupid — well, ignorant to be honest. How could I have been so callous? How could I have joined in on the frowning by an uniformed society? Maybe it’s bigotry…or maybe, it’s just civility. So, let’s talk about nature.
Homosexuality is natural. Yes, and polygamy is natural, too. Did you know that, in many species, one male procreates with many females? Well, you should. That knowledge would help you to justify a lot of the problems in humanity. I mean, a man’s natural instinct is to spread his seed, so how can you credibly chastise him for that? Adultery? Polygamy? Well, they’re just natural.
Have you ever heard of competitive infanticide (look under poygany)? It’s not really a big deal, but where in some species, males will kill other younger males to perpetuate their own virility. You know, eliminate the competition, like in business. Every human male would naturally kill a young boy to stop him from copulating with females, right? So what about murder? Relax, it’s only natural.
Let’s talk about nature. I hate you. You threaten me. I will kill you. That’s natural, right? You can’t judge me for killing you, because it happens in nature in almost every species. See that young girl over there? I think I want to have sex with her. I’ll try to make it quick, because, I – am – starving! Is KFC still open? Hey, if you don’t like it, well, I’ll just kill you. No, no, and absolutely no! You cannot punish me, because who are you? My behavior is 100% natural. Check science, buddy.
Monkeys fling their own poop at each other. Of course, it’s just a natural occurrence. What human doesn’t throw poop at other people in the heat of an argument? Uh, well, the civilized ones. That’s who.
I am so sick and tired of listening to the silver-tongued devils on the left — feeding us poetic words of love and acceptance. If they want to use nature as justification, then they need to be prepared to justify a whole world of evil. They need to be ready to release every murderer, rapist, child molester and thief in prison today, because those “crimes” are not crimes at all.
You see, any level-headed liberal would inform you that these actions are, well, only natural.
Popularity: 3% [?]
Some of us are indeed too "human" to be "natural"……..yet, well what a relief, some of us are not really "of this world".
Sure, that'll cause another stink……….only because they know not (again) what they argue about.
The Left ain't worried about civility, they want those votes to secure all majority across the board. They can take this US of Muslim/Mexican/Idiot descent and kiss their own azz goodbye.
Nice spin on this Mr. Ron.
Yes, those of us that choose to not be of this world see things from a more highly "evolved" perspective, I purport. How ironic that Humanistic, Darwinian, Liberals would have to be considered less evolved than their conservative counterparts.
Well, you and I both know that they are just full of crap anyway. It still baffles me how Darwin's theory is accepted as scientific fact, when it is supported by less tangible evidence than the existence of Sasquatch and Nessie. Have you seen any photoshopped ape-men? Me neither.
Like all things (in all topics here) ….
Political power pushes ideology, whether it is “truth” or a lie matters not.
A big “marketing plan” I bought into (at first) several years ago had nothing to do with “truth”. The basis was to sell “your” product a.k.a any product (even a bag of [expletive]…word for word on the paperwork) no matter what it was.
Sure, the basis was that it mattered not to have a “good” product, but to be a GREAT SALESMAN. The storyline went that one could easily sell any old “bag of [expletive]” to anyone else with the “power” of sales marketing skills.
In other words, lie cheat or steal no matter…just “sell” your idea to another ignorant azz not wise enough to stop the crime.
American Freedom, we asked for it…we got it.
How about the inverse of your rhetorical argument, Ron. The syllogism would go something like this:
What is natural is good. Anything not good is evil. Adoption is not natural. Therefore, adoption is evil.
Awake,
I agree with you. We are not a Christian Nation. If we were, things would be very different in this country from a socio-economic perspective. Don't you agree?
In answer to your question about morality, I think it's best to go with the ideal.
However, your reality gage won't hunt in this context. It almost looks like you think that if you simply beg the question, it dismisses the entire argument. Like this, for example: Who are you to say life has value? What enduring principle leads you to that conclusion? Is it absolute or arbitrary?
As for speaking for himself, I believe the author just did.
Your final point is the one where you really hit the hammer on your thumb. Which makes me think you're actually asleep instead of "awake." Please explain to me how you arrive at the conclusion that there is both good and bad in nature. Are you stating that unequivocally? Also, on what do you base your claim that we are all naturally bisexual? Is that a well documented fact or just your opinion?
Finally, homosexual behavior is a big deal, if it endangers the lives you claim to value. It does. That being the case, I'm wondering how you square your claim to value life with your endorsement of a lifestyle choice which actually is detrimental to life.
"According to Barack Obama, the United States is not a Christian nation,"
[actually we are a nation of many religions and many versions of Christianity ]
"yet we are a Muslim “country.” In fact, many on the left would tell you
that our founding fathers wanted to keep religion out of our government"
[actually they wanted facts to rule the land and not witch hunts (literally)]
"completely. That, my friends, is a different discussion for different day.
But, what if we discount Christian morality? "
[which Christians morality? Jesus or the worst abuses of some so-called Christians? ]
"What, then, do we use to gage right and wrong? "
[how about reality?
1) we are alive >> 2) the universe is alive
3) life matters...has value >> conclusion: live life, respect life, promote life,
how hard was that!]
"Many would say that we only have to turn to nature and
observe what the animals do. Hence, right and wrong should be defined,
not by what is moral, but what is natural.
Homosexuality is natural. Take a look at penguins, and you will quickly
see that homosexual couples are perfectly normal. Some gay penguin couples
even pretend that rocks are eggs. Isn’t that sweet? Yes, modern society
frowns upon the act of homosexuality, "
[speak for yourself]
[“natural” is pretty much useless as a guide because there is both good and bad in “nature”.
“Homosexuality” is simply two people having sex. thats it. marriage or NOT liking hot people of the opposite sex is NOT homosexual...its just stupid. we are all "naturally" bisexual...if you chose to acknowledge it or act on it thats on you...but if you bring the subject up, which you have, then its you responsibility to face the music: there are hot guys. fun guys. period. that doesnt mean you have to pretend there are not hot women. The whole Homo issue is, itself, not a big deal. its people and politics that have the problems. ]
Oh geez, Awake, you're not bright.
First, I implicitly sought to avoid the religious argument. I won't address it again.
AWAKE: "[how about reality?]"
Yours or mine? Absolute reality would lead to God.
AWAKE: "natural” is pretty much useless as a guide because there is both good and bad in “nature”.
“Homosexuality” is simply two people having sex. thats it. marriage or NOT liking hot people of the opposite sex is NOT homosexual…its just stupid."
What are you trying to say? You don't make sense. Are you saying that it is stupid to be attracted to the opposite sex? Regardless, you admit the natural excuse is lame. Do you have a point?
If this is how you think when you are awake, I'd hate to hear your thoughts when you're asleep.
Interesting, that last sentence. Funny how a little thing like a comma can totally change the meaning of a sentence, or in this case, the omission of a comma can lead to complete and utter ambiguity. I also had trouble with that statement, Ron. So I just ended up making an assumption. Weird.