Quoting hal9g:

Quote:

Surprise!

I will concede the point that homosexuality may be "common" in nature under the broadest possible definition of that term, since that discussion was doomed.

Given that, and the fact that you are arguing that because something is "common" in nature, therefore "natural", then it follows that it is not "unnatural" for humans as I originally posted.  Then you must believe that the following behaviors, which are also "common" in nature, and therefore "natural" for animals, must also be natural for humans in the same way homosexuality is natural for humans because it is "common" in nature:

1. Running around butt naked
2. Licking one's own genitals in public
3. Licking the genitals/butt of another member of your species in public
4. Defecating in public
5. Urinating in public
6. Eating the feces of another member of your species
7. Nursing one's offspring in public
7. Having sex in public (hetero or homosexual)
8. Stalking, pursuing, catching, killing and devouring prey without the use of tools and without cooking


Shall I go on?

Just because something is "natural" for an animal to engage in, does not mean that it is natural for humans to engage in it as well.  After all, we are capable of higher brain functions and not driven solely by our hormones.  It is one of many things that set us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom!

so lets takes some of these shall we?

1. Running around butt naked
If you belong to a naturist group then this would be perfectly normal.
2. Licking one's own genitals in public
3. Licking the genitals/butt of another member of your species in public
4. Defecating in public
5. Urinating in public
6. Eating the feces of another member of your species
7. Nursing one's offspring in public
Since that seems to be going on more nowadays has it just become more socially acceptable? If it happens at all doesn't that mean that could call it natural but was previously not allowed due to what was socially acceptable. And of course prehistoric woman would have done this - and yes, I admit I didn't live those millions of years ago.
7. Having sex in public (hetero or homosexual)
8. Stalking, pursuing, catching, killing and devouring prey without the use of tools and without cooking
When prehistoric man ran around capturing prey does this count? Or African natives today? Or Australian aborigines etc? They probably used tools - spears / arrows etc but since that was because they were able to use tools does that mean they don't count?

Quoting Darxon:

Quote:

And maybe we can agree, that a claim without any secular reason to back it up, is very hard to sell to people outside of the releigious motivation leading to said claim?

Most definitely.

Like it or not the vast majority of our legal code is based on moral axioms whose roots are religious and that have been time tested over thousands of years.  They are a way to regulate acceptable behavior in a civilized world.  What is needed is a balance of both.

However, it is not necessary to "sell" it to the seculars.  All that needs to be done is to determine if it is "constitutional".

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
More importantly I am deeply saddened that in today's, supposedly enlightened, world that people still cannot just live and let live.

Excellent post Pantheon!
I'm not only offended and saddened by some of the attitudes in this thread, I'm actually shocked and a little bit scared that there is still such ignorance about homosexuality and barely-disguised hatred towards it in the 21st Century.
It took me many years to come to terms with my sexuality, and those years were not pretty. To have people casually state that I simply chose to live the way I do, cheapens the utter misery I went through before finally accepting who I am.

Just got caught up here:

Pantheon - BRAVO greenie on me

Northbloke - Excellent as well greenie also

I'm not sure if any opinions have changed from some of the great posts here, but I think it's safe to say those still espousing a non-enlightened POV will not be moved (change) with more posting. Values change over time, what was not socially acceptable, becomes acceptable.  Change is the one constant in the universe; unfortunately some are still stuck in the past, cling to it, & resist the uncertainties inherent in change.

Rick

Quoting Rico:

Quote:
I'm not sure if any opinions have changed from some of the great posts here, but I think it's safe to say those still espousing a non-enlightened POV will not be moved (change) with more posting. Values change over time, what was not socially acceptable, becomes acceptable.  Change is the one constant in the universe; unfortunately some are still stuck in the past, cling to it, & resist the uncertainties inherent in change.

Quoting Northbloke:

Quote:
Excellent post Pantheon!
I'm not only offended and saddened by some of the attitudes in this thread, I'm actually shocked and a little bit scared that there is still such ignorance about homosexuality and barely-disguised hatred towards it in the 21st Century.
It took me many years to come to terms with my sexuality, and those years were not pretty. To have people casually state that I simply chose to live the way I do, cheapens the utter misery I went through before finally accepting who I am.

I have to respond to the "barely-disguised hatred" show in these posts -- not to mention the outright arrogance and self-righteous posturing about my (and others) "non-enlightened POV".

Just to clarify I have openly gay friends and do not hate gays. I have no objection to what 2 consenting adults may choose to do in the privacy of their own home - no do I have any problem with a gay couple having a ceremony and calling it whatever they want -- there is no law against any of this. My only objection is to the state officially endorsing these unions and more specifically calling them "marriages".

Any assertion to the contrary is not based on any of my posts or those of anyone else on this thread.

Those that put themselves on some high pedestal of purity and light and look down upon those that disagree are displaying the worst kind of arrogance. Not all change is good and not all changes in what is acceptable to society is a positive development. For instance the oversexualization of women particularly younger teens is disturbing to me (I don't care whether I'm considered unenlightened for thinking so). There any many examples I could provide of this.

Some societal changes have clearly been positive including those relating to greater acceptance of gays - in particular I am glad to see less condoning of violence towards gays.

I am sad to see that the thought police are out in abundance on these threads -- I have received multiple red arrows for merely expressing my opinion and have been compared to racists, apartheid supporters, radical Islamists stoning women, etc. My religious beliefs have been belittled and condemned (as have others). If we cannot exchange ideas about a controversial issue without it leading to religious bigotry then where are we as a society.

It is quite possible to be a good, decent, intelligent, and thoughtful person on either side of this issue. I respect the right of those who want legal gay marriage to advocate for it and try to convince others to support it --- all I ask is that some of that same respect be extended to me and the others on my side of the debate.

Brian

Quoting Lithurge:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:

7. Nursing one's offspring in public

Seems quite a natural thing in loads of countries. 

OK..so maybe not the best example.

How about eating their young?

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting Lithurge:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:

7. Nursing one's offspring in public

Seems quite a natural thing in loads of countries. 

OK..so maybe not the best example.

How about eating their young?

I'll give you that one 

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
I do not believe (even given all the insults) that any post in this thread is deserving of one

Quote:
Unless I'm mistaken isn't the point of the rating/arrow system to indicate when users have found statements in the forum to be offensive or upsetting?

I personally found much of what was stated in this thread to be offensive and upsetting.  Therefore I am proud to say I used my entire negative quota in one go. And, quite frankly, they were all well deserved.

For this I get a negative mark? With everything else that has been said in this despicable thread I get a negative for stating that I was offended?
Sheesh!

And I wonder why I keep my participation in this forum to a minimum....oh, wait...no I don't. This thread is why!!!!