Absolute Anime

im not losing the argument...
besides you think its my pathetic atempt when you actualy got the dictionary definition for normal? yeah sure... its my pathetic atempt... whatever helps you sleep at night pal.

Homunculus_Lust wrote:im not losing the argument...
besides you think its my pathetic atempt when you actualy got the dictionary definition for normal? yeah sure... its my pathetic atempt... whatever helps you sleep at night pal.

I was just showing you what the norm actually means. Your questions showed you had an obviously skewed view of the concept and I was just helping out.

And yes, it's quite clear you are losing the argument, because your argument isn't about gay marriage and the rights of homosexuals. Your argument is about twisting my words to prove me wrong somehow. Not to mention the fact that you're just trying to mock me now with lame comebacks.

I thought you had better things to do with your time?

GravyTrain wrote:

Locke wrote:

GravyTrain wrote:You had to throw the racism remark in there, didn't you. There is a big difference between having some weird sexual fetish and the natural distribution of melanin in the skin.

There's a difference between a "weird sexual fetish" and being born homosexual. Homosexuality isn't a choice.

I didn't say it was a choice. Well, not a choice as in say, someone makes a choice to rob a bank. Usually, fetishes are something a person can't help but be compelled to. A fetish can be caused by personal preferences, as well as environment and even heredity to a certain extent. Same with being a homosexual. Chemical imbalances in the hypothalamus may cause a disorientation in sexual preference, however, environment and simply what the person likes can have just as much of an impact.

Dude. You can't compare homosexuality to fetishes. A fetish, for example, someone who is severely turned on by men with long hair in a tarzan uniform, lol, is born from human imagination and perception, which is separate from an inherent desire, or instinct. More animals enagage in homosexuality than those that don't. But no animals other than humans dress up and use bondage, yada yada yah. lol. I suppose that you can argue that "maybe they want to dress up in police atire, but the dress-up shop just doesn't make outfits in their size" but I think it has more to do with dogs and cats mental limitation. Relatively speaking, they can only do what is intrinsic., and natural. One of those things being: Practicing homosexuality.


Sorry I'm a bit late guys, I went and had lunch. -_-

In previewing my post I saw the updates, and all I have to say to Gravy's post (to prevent me having to post again) is that homosexuality is something nature intended, and it serves a purpose.

Practice. lol. When the male finds a mate, it would be better for the species if he knew how reproduce.

Locke wrote:

GravyTrain wrote:

Locke wrote:

GravyTrain wrote:You had to throw the racism remark in there, didn't you. There is a big difference between having some weird sexual fetish and the natural distribution of melanin in the skin.

There's a difference between a "weird sexual fetish" and being born homosexual. Homosexuality isn't a choice.

I didn't say it was a choice. Well, not a choice as in say, someone makes a choice to rob a bank. Usually, fetishes are something a person can't help but be compelled to. A fetish can be caused by personal preferences, as well as environment and even heredity to a certain extent. Same with being a homosexual. Chemical imbalances in the hypothalamus may cause a disorientation in sexual preference, however, environment and simply what the person likes can have just as much of an impact.

Dude. You can't compare homosexuality to fetishes. A fetish, for example, someone who is severely turned on by men with long hair in a tarzan uniform, lol, is born from human imagination and perception, which is separate from an inherent desire, or instinct. More animals engage in homosexuality than those that don't. But no animals other than humans dress up and use bondage, yada yada yah. lol. I suppose that you can argue that "maybe they want to dress up in police atire, but the dress-up shop just doesn't make outfits in their size" but I think it has more to do with dogs and cats mental limitation. Relatively speaking, they can only do what is intrinsic., and natural. One of those things being: Practicing homosexuality.

Sorry I'm a bit late guys, I went and had lunch. -_-

In previewing my post I saw the updates, and all I have to say to Gravy's post (to prevent me having to post again) is that homosexuality is something nature intended, and it serves a purpose.

Practice. lol. When the male finds a mate, it would be better for the species if he knew how reproduce.

excellently spoken locke. even if you were not totaly agreeing with me thats what i was trying to say as well. i guess i just wasn't concise enough.

besides GT, i don't have to manifest your words to turn against you. your doing it for me.

Locke wrote: have to say to Gravy's post (to prevent me having to post again) is that homosexuality is something nature intended, and it serves a purpose.

Nature intend homosexuality? Nature isn't some self-conscious being that makes deliberate decisions. Organisms follow a genetic code and sometimes there are abnormalities in that code. Sometimes they can be good, sometimes bad. Homosexuality, if it is inherited, is not something intended, just something that strays fromt the norm. Not everyting that occurs in nature is intended for some purpose. What good does my third nipple do?

As for the fetish remark. Touche. It may not be the same thing, but my point is that homosexuality may be multifactorial, in that it is caused by inheritence as well as environment.

Homunculus_Lust wrote: besides GT, i don't have to manifest your words to turn against you. your doing it for me.

Lol. You think Locke is here to back you up and all of a sudden you think I'm just falling into some manipulative trap of yours. Locke is making the good points for you. Stop hiding behind him. My arguments against the points you made against me have perfectly reasonable backing.

GravyTrain wrote:

Locke wrote: have to say to Gravy's post (to prevent me having to post again) is that homosexuality is something nature intended, and it serves a purpose.

Nature intend homosexuality? Nature isn't some self-conscious being that makes deliberate decisions. Organisms follow a genetic code and sometimes there are abnormalities in that code. Sometimes they can be good, sometimes bad. Homosexuality, if it is inherited, is not something intended, just something that strays fromt the norm. Not everyting that occurs in nature is intended for some purpose. What good does my third nipple do?

Ok. Well. I agree about the "self-conscious ... deliberate decisions" bit. Poor wording on my part. What I was getting at is that homosexuality serves a function in nature. Just like the penis and vagina. A lot of it has to do with education of the species.

Your third nipple is a physical deformity, which is different from homosexuality, which teaches the males of certain species how to reproduce. lol. You could come up with an awesome argument about "yeah! Nature teaches them to go for the wrong hole" but think about the position most animals use.
Anyway, I think homosexuality is an inherent/natural trait which due to evolution of our species has lost its practical purpose.

im not saying that locke was my back up. i made my point. he made his. and your still making yours.
but your saying that being gay is a chemical disorder.
1. its not against nature. nature dosn't have a template. things happen. thats how it works.
2. when you show me your PHD in the field of "how the mind works" ill belive you...

Homunculus_Lust wrote:im not saying that locke was my back up. i made my point. he made his. and your still making yours.
but your saying that being gay is a chemical disorder.
1. its not against nature. nature dosn't have a template. things happen. thats how it works.
2. when you show me your PHD, ill belive you...

I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
lol

lol

GravyTrain wrote:

Homunculus_Lust wrote:im not saying that locke was my back up. i made my point. he made his. and your still making yours.
but your saying that being gay is a chemical disorder.
1. its not against nature. nature dosn't have a template. things happen. thats how it works.
2. when you show me your PHD, ill belive you...

I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
lol

lol. Whenever you make a comment like that I imagine you're pulling the same face as the guy in your avatar.

Locke wrote:

GravyTrain wrote:

Homunculus_Lust wrote:im not saying that locke was my back up. i made my point. he made his. and your still making yours.
but your saying that being gay is a chemical disorder.
1. its not against nature. nature dosn't have a template. things happen. thats how it works.
2. when you show me your PHD, ill belive you...

I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
lol

lol. Whenever you make a comment like that I imagine you're pulling the same face as the guy in your avatar.

ahhaha....O.o

wow what have i started

Priestess Kisara wrote: wow what have i started

You knew damn right.

Homunculus_Envy wrote:

Locke wrote:

GravyTrain wrote:

Homunculus_Lust wrote:im not saying that locke was my back up. i made my point. he made his. and your still making yours.
but your saying that being gay is a chemical disorder.
1. its not against nature. nature dosn't have a template. things happen. thats how it works.
2. when you show me your PHD, ill belive you...

I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
lol

lol. Whenever you make a comment like that I imagine you're pulling the same face as the guy in your avatar.

ahhaha....O.o

lol your powers of prediction are incredible. lol jk.