Reproduction doesn't occur with two men ONLY proves that it's NOT MEANT TO BE.
If you tried to copulate with a giraffe, it wouldn't work would it? It's not normal, you won't get it pregnant, because of chromosomal problems, nature's way of saying "this isn't right"
If everyone turned gay...considering being gay is not a problem, if everyone did turn gay what would happen to the species? And no one wanted to mate with the opposite sex to procreate, keeping in mind this is a nature point of view. Then is it still not a problem?
Bah, I don't have time to argue this. I rest my case. It's not normal, I win. K? Thanks
48 comments
If everyone turned gay...considering being gay is not a problem, if everyone did turn gay what would happen to the species?
We would continue because we have technology that lets us have children without sex.
"Reproduction doesn't occur with two men ONLY proves that it's NOT MEANT TO BE."
So, every time you have sex with a woman (HA! Like that has ever happened) she has to give birth?
"If you tried to copulate with a giraffe, it wouldn't work would it? It's not normal, you won't get it pregnant, because of chromosomal problems, nature's way of saying "this isn't right"
You would also need a ladder. And why, of all animals, did you choose a giraffe for your silly little example? Is it a secret fantasy?
"If everyone turned gay"
How many more times must you imbeciles be told? People DO NOT choose their sexuality.
"I rest my case. It's not normal, I win."
Not even close, my friend.
"if everyone did turn gay what would happen to the species? And no one wanted to mate with the opposite sex to procreate, keeping in mind this is a nature point of view. Then is it still not a problem?"
And what if everyone were celibate like Jesus? What would happen to the species? This is not a problem? Jesus was clearly being immoral for engaging in celibacy.
The response to this nutcase's post in the ChristianForums thread is actually quite surprising.
This kid, unfortunately, is just an idiot.
Homosexuality is so plainly abhorrent, abominable, wrong, and unnatural that if we didn't persecute homosexuals, everyone would just automatically become one.
Reproduction doesn't occur with two men ONLY proves that it's NOT MEANT TO BE.
By this logic, ping-pong and chess between two men aren't meant to be either. Neither results in reproduction.
if everyone did turn gay what would happen to the species?
People don't "turn gay". They either are or they aren't. I wouldn't have sex with a guy if I had a gun to my head; not because I don't like gays or think it's some kind of sin, but because I'm not attracted to men.
I'll start worrying about gays holding down the population when people from Mexico and the Dominican Republic stop trying to sneak into the US because their own overpopulated countries can't feed them.
Okay, so two men aren't meant to biologically reproduce with each other.
What the fuck is your point, Captain Obvious?
You must be that special kind of asshole who thinks it's wrong to enjoy sex. Especially for women.
"Bah, I don't have time to argue this. I rest my case. It's not normal, I win. K? Thanks"
It's not natural to believe in a supernatural being, either. It's a response to rearing.
Whereas homosexuality has a 99.9% chance of being a genetic phenomena.
For some reason, I think that if men could procreate with each other, these people would still come up with an excuse to hate them.
Hey, retard. Do you honestly think that if for some unknown reason, that the world turned "totally gay", that it would happen so quickly that no one on planet earth would have the forsight to stock up the sperm banks and increase the number of fertility doctors and clinics? I mean, out of 7 billion people, I'm sure ONE person would be struck with the idea, but it doesn't matter when you've rested your case in your asshole.
You just gotta love the closing line,
"I'm right, you're wrong. Bye!" The kid could give lessons to Bill O'Reilly on arrogant debating tactics.
Doesn't the Super Christian Fun Book state that it's better to be celibate than married? If everyone practiced celibacy, the species would be no better off than if everyone was homosexual. You'd still be in a situation where no one "wanted to mate with the opposite sex to procreate," only this one would be one your God supposedly endorses.
So I guess sterile people should not be allowed sex either, since they can't reproduce?
Since it's about reproduction, then I suppose you oppose birth control, condoms, spermicide, vasectomies, hysterectomies, and celibacy too, hm?
I guess then all those poor infertile heterosexual couples are also "not meant to be". Also all those couples in which they are too old to have kids. After all, their relationship cannot result in babies!
BTW In(s)aneRecluse, if everyone "turned gay" (once a-friggin'-gain: not possible!), then people would use sperm/egg donorship and surrogacy to produce children. They could use artifical insemination, which only requires two willing people of normal fertility and a turkey baster. If it came right down to it and the human race were in danger of dying out, I am sure there are people who would even be willing to have heterosexual sex, despite their aversion to it. Just like hetero people would probably do if there were very few of them left, even if they had no attraction to or affection for one another.
Oh btw, I am also wondering what's your take on people born with chromosomal abnormalities (i.e. down's syndrome, genetic diseases, etc). Should we start killing them now and aborting new ones in the womb because they're "not meant to be"? After all, you're so sure that it's NOT NORMAL!!!
Also, if nature thinks homosexuality "isn't right", then, uh... why do we find it IN NATURE? It's not exclusive to humans, you know.
@AL: Jesus had the disconcerting (to his male disciples) habit of kissing Mary Magdalene full on the lips. In public. I don't know, I can't jibe this with celibacy. The Gospel of Philip relates....
@Pix: Saul advocated celibacy, probably because he couldn't get none.
"InsaneRecluse" [appropriate username award?]: Crawl back under your rock, K? thx bai.
You are teh fail teh tubes. Kthx bai!
...I just saw his username. Yeah, he sounds like an insane recluse.
The reason all these fundies are scared that everyone will turn gay without God is because a lot of them are repressing themselves.
When I was a fundie (not as bad as the people mentioned on the site, tho) I know I was repressing it. Now, I'm free to be myself and date who I want.
If a large percentage of the world was gay, we'd actually be better off considering the rate at which the population is currently increasing. We'd need less energy and land and use fewer resources, so there'd be less global warming, extinction and pollution and more resources and housing to go around.
Hey Maw, come quick and see this! it's the biggest IF I ever saw!
And no, it is not a problem. We would still have sperm banks, lesbians willing to become mothers, gay couples willing to adopt. It would be very different from society as you knew it, but then again, that's what I think you're REALLY afraid of.
If you wear a condom, no one will get pregnant, either.
If the woman is past menopause and she and her male partner have sex, they also won't get pregnant.
Your very stupid point being???
Hey, procreation's no problem! The perfect solution would be for everyone to turn bisexual. There would still be babies and it would double everyone's chance to get laid on Saturday night(except, maybe yours)!
Reading the Bible doesn't advance the human race biologically either... I guess that's nature's way of saying "being a fundie isn't right".
I rest my case. It's not normal, I win. K? Thanks.
InsaneRecluse......
I am a Christian, who agrees that homosexuality is wrong....
But DAMN those were some leaps in logic....
OK, let me explain this the best I can. There is more to reproductive fitness than just having as many babies as possible. You could choose to have less children (and there are various traditional methods of restricting number of children, but I won't overload your mind) and really focus on raising them. More resources for the children you do have.
Next point, stay with me now, in order to have your genetic material represented in the next generation you don't have to have offspring yourself. If your sister has 4 children, that's the same as you having two of your own. So if you look after extended family, you are in fact contributing to your own fitness. This is called kin selection.
Right, here's where the homosexuality part comes in. Even if someone NEVER has sex with the opposite sex, they can still improve their reproductive success by supporting family. This is known as The Gay Uncle theory. In some cases, it may be an advantage to have an extra adult contributing to the tribe who doesn't have dependents.
OK, so exclusive homosexuality is not disadvantageous, so it will not be 'bred' out of a population. Flexibility in sexuality (or 'bisexuality') is even an advantage. For example, if you were a species with a high infant dependency stage that requires at least two parents to look after them, then increasing the potential pool of mates would be advantageous. Some species need a fixed pair bond to maintain territory. Beyond fertilisation (in the relatively few species that have sexual reproduction) any combination of male/female can do the job.
"Bah, I don't have time to argue this. I rest my case. It's not normal, I win. K?"
So InsaneRecluse. I guess you don't wear clothes, drive, go to see a doctor when you're sick, use a computer, etc, etc. You do? But none of them are natural. Guess you're just an idiot. What a shame.
If you tried to copulate with a giraffe, it wouldn't work would it?
Well I'll have to take your word for that. I tried, but the friggin' stepladder wasn't high enough.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
