Why Homosexuality Should be Banned

[Westaway]

The video I found quite humourous. Although I can't see posting it as anything else other than trollbait as it is rather... obnoxious at the same time. Some people will be too dumb to take it how its supposed to be taken and will see it as an attack against homosexuality.

Plus there is the fact its your very first post.

I agree, but the real reason I quoted you is your awsome SuperJail Jailbot avatar. You have awsome tastes in cartoons.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

Funny video, but gay marriage is bullshit. So is straight marriage. The fact that couples who like to screw get special privileges / rules is a bunch of malarkey.

 

[n00beffect]

(rofl) Nicely done.

 

[mega48man]

ants and bees are still making sure the babies are being made right? we have Child protection services, and that's people protecting kids who aren't theirs, just like the ants and bees. but that's not relevant. what is relevant; penis+vagina=babies. no wait, that's just porn.

Your logic only works if more gay people = less straight people.
It doesn't work like that.

And no, social services and child protection does not protect children the way a parent does.
And are you really saying that we should just toss all the unwanted children into foster care or some such, instead of letting them be raised by loving, willing parents?

i never said anything like that. you're taking what i'm saying and interpreting it differently. i'm just saying things, not arguments.

but, as to the whole willing parents things, i have a friend who called his friend to call CPS because his dad was getting violent. is that a loving parent? no, CPS is there for a reason jackass. some kids aren't fortunate to have those loving and kind parents other kids do. unwanted children should absolutely be given to adoption at the earliest age possible, that way they can live a normal childhood until the day they're told the truth about their adoption. when old enough and mature enough to accept a truth like that, they'll be at the point where they can move past that and ignore the lie and accept their foster parents as they're real parents because of the love they've given them through their childhood.

and more gay people=less straight people makes perfect sense from a factual standpoint, not a bias standpoint. there's a fixed population and if the percentage of gay population increases, then the percentage of straight population decreases. imagine a bar that's red on one side and blue on the other side. if you move the blue side closer to the other end, the red side becomes smaller. next level statistics maneuver, f**kin smart.

imagine if 50% of america was gay. that'd mean the other 50% of america would be straight. i'm sure the percentages are different, but imagine if it was 50/50 10 or 15 years from now. you see? it just makes, more apple pie means less pumpkin pie. either way, there's plenty of porn on the interent to keep straight people satisfied :3

 

[ShadowsofHope]

last thing; animals, including humans, are built on the sole instinct to survive and keep our species alive. to do that, we need to fuck and make babies. this usually works best with someone of the opposite sex. however, if 2 dudes fucks, they can't have babies, thus, their basic instinct to further protect the species from extinction that should be there isn't.

I'm pretty sure considering the majority of humanity is heterosexual and we are currently in an age of population overgrowth, having a population percentage of nearly 8-10% of identifying homosexual individuals not creating babies has a very strong inclination to do fuck all in holding back the majority from propagating the human race, I'm afraid.

If those numbers were reversed, or homosexuality was more about 40+% of the population.. then you might actually have a legitimate argument upon that basis.

you had to bring numbers into this.....damn

heterosexuals who don't have babies still fuck, right? however, changes in contemporary society have made it "ok" to not have babies. it's not post WW2 where people were encouraged to have kids, or industrial revolution era america where women were expected to have at least 1 child. this is an america where some people don't want to pay for years of child support or even put up with having kids.

put that wasn't my point. my point was penis+vagina=babies. and square root of babies is ensuring the survival of the human race. that's where i left my statement, you turned it into an argument. i'm not trying to argue, i'm just saying things that make sense. bread+butter=food, right? then penis+vagina=babies

I realize that, however just because penis + vagina = babies, and propagating the species = long term survival of the race, doesn't mean that everyone and their mothers will have to create a baby of their own at some point in their lives. We have enough newborns and children in existence all around the world right now to survive several more generations with only half of the total number of heterosexuals in the world right now fucking for the purpose of baby creation, no less (assuming no World War III or a Hitler intent on killing off all the children, that is). We won't find a shortage of children being born from heterosexuals fucking anytime soon, I guarantee it.

As for your statement about the era after World War II, that was for the reasoning that several million human beings had just been snuffed out of existence due to fighting a damned war in which they were killed, and those whom returned were anxious with their long not-seen wives to have sex again and celebrate a return home by bringing into the world a new life when the world itself had just killed off so many. Our most recent modern day society has not had to deal with the amount of human death globally that those living during World War II had, and naturally do not feel as strong of an urge to bring more life into a world that is already struggling to maintain the life it currently supports. Human beings do not fuck to make babies when there is dwindling room and resources for them to come into the world to survive upon as another mouth to feed and a body to clothe, after all. There is survival of the race in terms of population, and there is survival of the race in terms of actually surviving the next few decades of one's life in a more or less healthy manner.

Guess which terms we are living in today?

holy shit, you're repeating what i'm saying. i'm done.

If you were saying such, it wasn't really that clear. However, yeah, there isn't anything more than needs to be said in this specific conversation. I'm done as well.

 

[pope_of_larry]

Ugh, this video is obnoxious...

I'm anti-homosexual (don't flame me), and I hate the way he basically makes up supposed arguments of anti-homosexual people.

i do not wish to flame you but may i ask why you are anti-homosexual is it because it is not normal or is it fear or is it just that you don't understand it or is it something else for the first no on is "normal" we all have quirks that make us weird (mine include saying BING BONG when i enter my house and eating block cheese with mayo spread on it or saying eh as a type of question mark... yes i'm Canadian) for the second well not much i can say there for the last i can understand it's weird and you have no connection it's like trying to describe colors to a person who has been blind since birth but honestly i'd like to hear why from an anti-homo who actually has manners (and just so you know i'm am straight so you don't need to talk about it in your response if you choose to respond) also if you say it's because it's unnatural well so is a computer and cars and all the other appliances we use on a daily basis and the unnatural claim is the only one i find complete crap (religion is protected cause hey hard to argue with someone you can't talk to aka god)

Why am I anti-gay marriage?

Because its not conductive to a happy, functioning society. It would completely destroy the institution of marriage (something already suffering from the amount of divorces). Gay marriages are almost always unhealthy, they leave the children involved in particular without proper role models, and leads to unhappiness for them later on. And, yes, homosexual is completely unnatural, and is (warning: this may be offensive) frankly immoral, hedonistic behavior. From a biological, ethical, and psychological perspective, it is unnatural behavior that should not accepted by society.


And no, I don't hate or fear homosexuals, I don't support any sort of violence against them. And don't take this as a hate speech, I'm open to debate and seeing your points of view as well.


Here's a website that has some points for and against it (and no, I don't agree with their point about religions): http://www.balancedpolitics.org/same_sex_marriages.htm

would you rather children go with out homes and change home every year or so, from what i have seen when that happens more time then not the kid dose not end up right. and it is natural this is a list of mammals alone that show homosexual behavior. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_displaying_homosexual_behavior#Mammals

Okay, can someone explain this to me? Why do gay animals excuse gay humans? Animals are cannibalistic, kill their young, promiscuous, and seek only to fulfill their base appetites...and we should emulate them...? Isn't man distinguished from animals by his freedom to choose the good? Or are we just animals now?

that would be because we are animals, mammals in fact.

 

[n00beffect]

bullshiterry

You know, smart-pants, bread+bread also equals food, so your argument is kind of piss-rediculous. As the guy above already said - we're perfectly populated as it is, and even if we weren't, I don't think biggot asshole dipshits (maybe like yourself, I say "maybe because I am not quite sure what your stance on this is, but by the looks of it you're anti-homo) should determine who should get married and who shouldn't. There's this thing called individualism, and if you haven't heard of it, it's basically a stance in society where a person does whatever the hell they want because they have NO OBLIGATION WHAT. SO. EVER. towards that society. And thankfully, today we're lucky enough to be able to take that stance. This is not some Socialist/Communist destopia where everything is done for the people and what not, so just get with it. I am not a homosexual, but what I am is a person who despises oppresion and pointless descrimination. Just because somebodys primitive mind hasn't evolved to the state where they can except simple anomalies like homosexuality does not make them right, or morally-correct. I personally don't believe in objective morallity so there!

 

[blackbird443]

I posted this to my best friend, who just happens to be a raging homo. And i love him to bits......but not in a gay one cause that would be wrong

 

[SarahSyna]

ants and bees are still making sure the babies are being made right? we have Child protection services, and that's people protecting kids who aren't theirs, just like the ants and bees. but that's not relevant. what is relevant; penis+vagina=babies. no wait, that's just porn.

Your logic only works if more gay people = less straight people.
It doesn't work like that.

And no, social services and child protection does not protect children the way a parent does.
And are you really saying that we should just toss all the unwanted children into foster care or some such, instead of letting them be raised by loving, willing parents?

i never said anything like that. you're taking what i'm saying and interpreting it differently. i'm just saying things, not arguments.

but, as to the whole willing parents things, i have a friend who called his friend to call CPS because his dad was getting violent. is that a loving parent? no, CPS is there for a reason jackass. some kids aren't fortunate to have those loving and kind parents other kids do. unwanted children should absolutely be given to adoption at the earliest age possible, that way they can live a normal childhood until the day they're told the truth about their adoption. when old enough and mature enough to accept a truth like that, they'll be at the point where they can move past that and ignore the lie and accept their foster parents as they're real parents because of the love they've given them through their childhood.

and more gay people=less straight people makes perfect sense from a factual standpoint, not a bias standpoint. there's a fixed population and if the percentage of gay population increases, then the percentage of straight population decreases. imagine a bar that's red on one side and blue on the other side. if you move the blue side closer to the other end, the red side becomes smaller. next level statistics maneuver, f**kin smart.

imagine if 50% of america was gay. that'd mean the other 50% of america would be straight. i'm sure the percentages are different, but imagine if it was 50/50 10 or 15 years from now. you see? it just makes, more apple pie means less pumpkin pie. either way, there's plenty of porn on the interent to keep straight people satisfied :3

....Lol. I say it again, Lol to you, Lol indeed and I have never said Lol before.

How is your ramble relevant?
No one saying 'Oh no, people should never adopt', so what are you blathering on for?

The world doesn't actually work like that. What, if a gay person is born does a straight person die or something? Because that is the only way your 'red bar, blue bar' concept of sexuality could happen. Sexualities don't exist in perfect proportion to each other.
There is not a fixed population. There isn't some magical population roof that we'll hit, or some mystical sexuality ratio we can mess with. It's entirely random. If the population was 50/50 Homo/Het, then it could just as easily be 6 billion both ways.

Also, you can have equal amount pumpkin and apple pie. There's no law that says "And so, if there are seven apple pie, there must only be three pumpkin!"
You can have ten apple pie and ten pumpkin pies, if that takes your fancy.

 

[Tdc2182]

Really? Still over half of the Country believes it's wrong?

Wow, I guess I need to do some work.

 

[pope_of_larry]

this should be moved in to religion and politics well it did just start more or less as a joke it has moved past that.

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

I have yet to see exclusive homosexual behavior in the wild.

Homo Sapiens Sapiens exhibits exclusive homosexual behavior in the wild.

Lol. Awesome point is awesome and your avatar makes it even cooler.

Awesome video. It's old, but I've never seen it before, so thanks for sharing!

Glad you liked it

Really? Still over half of the Country believes it's wrong?

Wow, I guess I need to do some work.

Get to it! Spread the knowledge of love ^^

 

[Atlas13]

1: The unhealthiness of gay marriages: http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02: This gives info on the issue. To sum it up: gays do worse than heterosexual marriages in the following catagories:
-relationship duration
-monogamy vs. promiscuity
-relationship commitment
-number of children being raised
-health risks
-rates of intimate partner violence

2: The children: Statistics for this are conflicting, but I will say that, yes, you can find role models elsewhere, but children do need a mother and father to be raised properly (I'll try to get more info on this later).

3: Unnatural: It clearly goes against basic human nature on a Biological and psychological level. Men are meant to be attracted to women in order to propagate the species. Anything that goes against human nature is obviously wrong.

4: Immoral and Hedonistic: The infertile having sex is hedonistic? No, if there're married its not, there's nothing wrong per say with pleasure. Its when a person ignores basic ethics and morality in order to achieve pleasure, thus making pleasure their ultimate goal, that it becomes hedonism. And according to my morality? There's one, objective morality, personal opinions aside. But I don't want to argue about relativism, if that's what you're putting forward, when that's kind of off topic...maybe a different time.

1. "The Family Research Council (FRC) is a Christian right group and lobbying organization"
There throws all of your evidence away, the source is completely biased on the subject. I mean, I spent 10 minutes on that site, and I saw nothing except bigotry, slander, and lies.
---
2. We agree, therefore there should be nothing wrong with having 2 gay parents.
---
3. un·nat·u·ral
?adjective
1.
contrary to the laws or course of nature.

I don't think you know what that word means. By this definition, and the proof of homosexual behavior IN animals, which, in turn, IS nature, calling it unnatural is completely wrong.

"It clearly goes against basic human nature"

And what the fuck is 'basic human nature' exactly? The want to just bash someone over the head with a rock, take their female, and breed? Human nature is a completely daft argument, as just because something isn't the norm, doesn't mean it should be. You are going against the norm right now, everyone is. It's called being an individual. We are not a hive mind, we are individual minds.
---
3. "there's nothing wrong per say with pleasure. Its when a person ignores basic ethics and morality in order to achieve pleasure, thus making pleasure their ultimate goal, that it becomes hedonism."

he·don·ism/ˈhēdnˌizəm/Noun
1. The pursuit of pleasure.
2. The ethical theory that pleasure is the highest good and proper aim of human life.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
-United States Declaration of Independence

Now, onto these "basic ethics." How exactly does having sex violate any ethical boundaries whatsoever.

"Ethics, also known as moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy that addresses questions about morality - that is, concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice, etc."

Good and evil, right and wrong, justice, virtue, and on and on and on. Yes they all sound very nice, now I have trouble understanding how having sex with anyone can be "evil" or "wrong." Why is it evil? And no, religion is not a valid excuse.

re·li·gion
noun
A particular system of faith and worship

Faith is not facts, it's belief. Facts are something that can be proven, faith is something that someone thinks. "Basic ethics" say that a few things can be evil. Now, how is sex 'evil'? As long as it brings all who are involved happiness, and does not remove the happiness of others, I see nothing evil in it.

 

[mega48man]

bullshiterry

You know, smart-pants, bread+bread also equals food, so your argument is kind of piss-rediculous. As the guy above already said - we're perfectly populated as it is, and even if we weren't, I don't think biggot asshole dipshits (maybe like yourself, I say "maybe because I am not quite sure what your stance on this is, but by the looks of it you're anti-homo) should determine who should get married and who shouldn't. There's this thing called individualism, and if you haven't heard of it, it's basically a stance in society where a person does whatever the hell they want because they have NO OBLIGATION WHAT. SO. EVER. towards that society. And thankfully, today we're lucky enough to be able to take that stance. This is not some Socialist/Communist destopia where everything is done for the people and what not, so just get with it. I am not a homosexual, but what I am is a person who despises oppresion and pointless descrimination. Just because somebodys primitive mind hasn't evolved to the state where they can except simple anomalies like homosexuality does not make them right, or morally-correct. I personally don't believe in objective morallity so there!

hoooooly shit, i don't even remember typing the word "bullshitery" on this forum, where the hell is all this hate coming from? you shouldn't have any reason to come at me like i'm hitler. i'm not against homosexuality whatsoever, i'm actually for the whole gay rights movement, i don't like seeing people get picked on because of who they are.

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

Funny video, but gay marriage is bullshit. So is straight marriage. The fact that couples who like to screw get special privileges / rules is a bunch of malarkey.

I understand your sentiments and sort of agree; to me, marriage is an outdated practice. But, I respect the right and want of others to marry those they love if it makes them happy.

Not trying to "call you out" or anything.

 

[mega48man]

ants and bees are still making sure the babies are being made right? we have Child protection services, and that's people protecting kids who aren't theirs, just like the ants and bees. but that's not relevant. what is relevant; penis+vagina=babies. no wait, that's just porn.

Your logic only works if more gay people = less straight people.
It doesn't work like that.

And no, social services and child protection does not protect children the way a parent does.
And are you really saying that we should just toss all the unwanted children into foster care or some such, instead of letting them be raised by loving, willing parents?

i never said anything like that. you're taking what i'm saying and interpreting it differently. i'm just saying things, not arguments.

but, as to the whole willing parents things, i have a friend who called his friend to call CPS because his dad was getting violent. is that a loving parent? no, CPS is there for a reason jackass. some kids aren't fortunate to have those loving and kind parents other kids do. unwanted children should absolutely be given to adoption at the earliest age possible, that way they can live a normal childhood until the day they're told the truth about their adoption. when old enough and mature enough to accept a truth like that, they'll be at the point where they can move past that and ignore the lie and accept their foster parents as they're real parents because of the love they've given them through their childhood.

and more gay people=less straight people makes perfect sense from a factual standpoint, not a bias standpoint. there's a fixed population and if the percentage of gay population increases, then the percentage of straight population decreases. imagine a bar that's red on one side and blue on the other side. if you move the blue side closer to the other end, the red side becomes smaller. next level statistics maneuver, f**kin smart.

imagine if 50% of america was gay. that'd mean the other 50% of america would be straight. i'm sure the percentages are different, but imagine if it was 50/50 10 or 15 years from now. you see? it just makes, more apple pie means less pumpkin pie. either way, there's plenty of porn on the interent to keep straight people satisfied :3

....Lol. I say it again, Lol to you, Lol indeed and I have never said Lol before.

How is your ramble relevant?
No one saying 'Oh no, people should never adopt', so what are you blathering on for?

The world doesn't actually work like that. What, if a gay person is born does a straight person die or something? Because that is the only way your 'red bar, blue bar' concept of sexuality could happen. Sexualities don't exist in perfect proportion to each other.
There is not a fixed population. There isn't some magical population roof that we'll hit, or some mystical sexuality ratio we can mess with. It's entirely random. If the population was 50/50 Homo/Het, then it could just as easily be 6 billion both ways.

Also, you can have equal amount pumpkin and apple pie. There's no law that says "And so, if there are seven apple pie, there must only be three pumpkin!"
You can have ten apple pie and ten pumpkin pies, if that takes your fancy.

first off, ten apple pie and ten pumpkin pie makes 20 pies, there's your fixed number, that also sound delicious. you're right, there is no law, besides math. math is the perfect law because you can't be punished for breaking the laws of math because they can't be broken. 1+2=3 and it can't be changed.

second, when someone makes the decision to be gay and is open about it, that's when red -1 and blue +1. duh. you learned addition and subtraction in kindergarden.

third, US census. they keep track of the population, people's sexual preferences, age ratios, where you live, the computer chip in the back of your brain, etc. there is a fixed number and it's the number of the population that the US census records each year, or whenever they record, i dunno. go google "gay/straight ratio" and you'll find that 1% of people are openly LGBT (now this is the percentage of people who are open about it, not including closet LGBT). this means that 99% of people are straight (omitting closets LGBT for now). now, if in the next 20 years, this percentage changes to 10%, that means 90% of people will be straight. either way, it adds up to 100%. so long as both percentages add up to 100%, it's a perfectly logical ratio.

this isn't meant to be bias or hateful in any way or form, it's math, and math is the most unbias thing there is, besides quakers, quakers are friggin awesome people at heart.

 

[pope_of_larry]

if marriage was just something that said these two people love each other and that all it meant and there was no benefits for doing it outlawing gay marriage would make more sense. but under u.s law marriage comes with benefits some of witch are listed here. http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/marriage-rights-benefits-30190.html

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

second, when someone makes the decision to be gay and is open about it, that's when red -1 and blue +1. duh. you learned addition and subtraction in kindergarden.

Sexual preference isn't something someone decides.

 

[SarahSyna]

first off, ten apple pie and ten pumpkin pie makes 20 pies, there's your fixed number, that also sound delicious. you're right, there is no law, besides math. math is the perfect law because you can't be punished for breaking the laws of math because they can't be broken. 1+2=3 and it can't be changed.

second, when someone makes the decision to be gay and is open about it, that's when red -1 and blue +1. duh. you learned addition and subtraction in kindergarden.

third, US census. they keep track of the population, people's sexual preferences, age ratios, where you live, the computer chip in the back of your brain, etc. there is a fixed number and it's the number of the population that the US census records each year, or whenever they record, i dunno. go google "gay/straight ratio" and you'll find that 1% of people are openly LGBT (now this is the percentage of people who are open about it, not including closet LGBT). this means that 99% of people are straight (omitting closets LGBT for now). now, if in the next 20 years, this percentage changes to 10%, that means 90% of people will be straight. either way, it adds up to 100%. so long as both percentages add up to 100%, it's a perfectly logical ratio.

this isn't meant to be bias or hateful in any way or form, it's math, and math is the most unbias thing there is, besides quakers, quakers are friggin awesome people at heart.

There's nothing saying you can only hand twenty pies. You could have thirty, or sixty three.

Ah, no.
You're not straight until proven gay. You're just plain gay. You were always on the other team, you just didn't realise or advertise as such. Also, the percentage of openly gay folks is around 3%. Not counting closeted people, though really is should since they've not straiught.

I'm pretty sure that a computer chip in your noggin would be a violation of civil rights.

100% is not a fixed number. It can be 2, 20 or 2000000. Either way, you're not proving any point. Actually, what is your point?

Also, maths is not a law.