NATION

PASSWORD

Why is homosexuality wrong?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:42 am

Objectiveland wrote:
Samuraikoku wrote:
In-vitro fertilization. Your argument is invalid.


In-vitro wasn't available to humans hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Neither were computers. Quickly, ban computers!
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Raeyh
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6275
Founded: Feb 24, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Raeyh » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:42 am

Divair wrote:
Raeyh wrote:
I don't understand why you would protect sex.

Listen to me: No.

If you want to remove your sexual desires, be my guest. You don't fuck with my body or my future family's body.


Ironic choice of words. If you want your children to remain chaste, you should join my side.

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:43 am

Objectiveland wrote:In-vitro wasn't available to humans hundreds of thousands of years ago.


Nor were computers. You shouldn't be posting.

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:43 am

Raeyh wrote:
Divair wrote:Listen to me: No.

If you want to remove your sexual desires, be my guest. You don't fuck with my body or my future family's body.


Ironic choice of words. If you want your children to remain chaste, you should join my side.

I don't. Once my kids are in their teens, they can fuck if they want to. I'll do my best to encourage them to do it safely, but it is ultimately their decision.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:43 am

Raeyh wrote:
Divair wrote:Listen to me: No.

If you want to remove your sexual desires, be my guest. You don't fuck with my body or my future family's body.


Ironic choice of words. If you want your children to remain chaste, you should join my side.


Darth Divair?
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Yumyumsuppertime
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 28799
Founded: Jun 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yumyumsuppertime » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:43 am

Objectiveland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:That's nice, but apparently you don't know that a defect is a subjective term. That's why scientists and medical professionals use the term disorder. :roll:


It most certianly is objective. I order for the human race to survive it must reproduce. "It acts automatically to further its life, it cannot act for its own destruction." Therefore acting in contradiction to survival is defective.


If you don't understand how evolution works, then please don't use evolution as an argument.

Here's a starting point so that you don't look quite as silly when advancing your arguments: http://www.livescience.com/6106-gay-unc ... genes.html

User avatar
Jormengand
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8414
Founded: May 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Jormengand » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:44 am

Raeyh wrote:
Divair wrote:Listen to me: No.

If you want to remove your sexual desires, be my guest. You don't fuck with my body or my future family's body.


Ironic choice of words. If you want your children to remain chaste, you should join my side.

And why would that be a good thing? Taking away what has been described as the greatest enjoyment in existence? Surely, the logical thing to do is maximise enjoyment?
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:44 am

Mavorpen wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
In-vitro wasn't available to humans hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Neither were computers. Quickly, ban computers!
Samuraikoku wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:In-vitro wasn't available to humans hundreds of thousands of years ago.


Nor were computers. You shouldn't be posting.


Image
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:44 am

Mavorpen wrote:(Image)


:geek:
Last edited by Samuraikoku on Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:45 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Jormengand
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8414
Founded: May 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Jormengand » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:45 am

Mavorpen wrote:(Image)

Ninja>samurai. *nods*
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 111677
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Farnhamia » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:45 am

Mavorpen wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:Neither were computers. Quickly, ban computers!
Samuraikoku wrote:
Nor were computers. You shouldn't be posting.


Image

As Neo likes to say, he's really bad at this.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Of the Free Socialist Territories
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8370
Founded: Feb 12, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Of the Free Socialist Territories » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:48 am

Ifreann wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
In-vitro wasn't available to humans hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Nor were the works of Ayn Rand.


God, those must have been happier days.
Don't be deceived when our Revolution has finally been stamped out and they tell you things are better now even if there's no poverty to see, because the poverty's been hidden...even if you ever got more wages and could afford to buy more of these new and useless goods which these new industries foist on you, and even if it seems to you that "you never had so much" - that is only the slogan of those who have much more than you.

Marat, "Marat/Sade"

User avatar
Ammar
Minister
 
Posts: 2840
Founded: Jul 17, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Ammar » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:48 am

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Nor were the works of Ayn Rand.


God, those must have been happier days.

Yeah,back when we could have someone killed just by saying "He/She is a witch!"
☻ / This is Bob, copy& paste him in
/▌ your sig so Bob can take over the
/ \ world.
Heads up: Ammar is a desert country.
Film Company - National Anthem - Encyclopedia
Victorious Decepticons
Orthella
Feminarchy
United Republic of Taiwan


User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:49 am

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Nor were the works of Ayn Rand.


God, those must have been happier days.

But there wasn't as much shit to make fun of.


...Never mind, there was Descartes and Pascal.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Yumyumsuppertime
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 28799
Founded: Jun 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yumyumsuppertime » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:50 am

Ammar wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
In-vitro wasn't available to humans hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Well now it is.You no longer have a leg to stand on. Besides,how many homos exist on this planet?


There's no way of telling. 2% of the population as a whole is at the low end of most estimates, meaning that as of today, approximately 139,474,768 gay people live on this planet. This doesn't account for transgendered or bisexual people, which would bring the total much higher. So, in other words, One hundred and thirty nine million, four hundred and seventy four thousand, seven hundred and sixty-eight people who are exclusively gay or lesbian live on this planet. That's a rather large number of people, approximately the same as the population of the United States in 1945.

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:51 am

And Objectiveland has retreated, again.

By the Emperor, we've won.

User avatar
Ammar
Minister
 
Posts: 2840
Founded: Jul 17, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Ammar » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:51 am

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Ammar wrote:Well now it is.You no longer have a leg to stand on. Besides,how many homos exist on this planet?


There's no way of telling. 2% of the population as a whole is at the low end of most estimates, meaning that as of today, approximately 139,474,768 gay people live on this planet. This doesn't account for transgendered or bisexual people, which would bring the total much higher. So, in other words, One hundred and thirty nine million, four hundred and seventy four thousand, seven hundred and sixty-eight people who are exclusively gay or lesbian live on this planet. That's a rather large number of people, approximately the same as the population of the United States in 1945.

Ok,now put it over the entire population of the Earth.
☻ / This is Bob, copy& paste him in
/▌ your sig so Bob can take over the
/ \ world.
Heads up: Ammar is a desert country.
Film Company - National Anthem - Encyclopedia
Victorious Decepticons
Orthella
Feminarchy
United Republic of Taiwan


User avatar
Raeyh
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6275
Founded: Feb 24, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Raeyh » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:51 am

Jormengand wrote:
Raeyh wrote:
Ironic choice of words. If you want your children to remain chaste, you should join my side.

And why would that be a good thing? Taking away what has been described as the greatest enjoyment in existence? Surely, the logical thing to do is maximise enjoyment?


You sound like a drug addict. Someone who believes he is unable to achieve happiness except through unhealthy activity of choice.

Besides, if it is the greatest source of enjoyment in existence, it is also the greatest source of agony in existence, too. Even just with homosexuals, look at all these people who now find themselves separated from the rest of society. It would be better if they never felt sexual desire at all.

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:51 am

Samuraikoku wrote:And Objectiveland has retreated, again.

By the Emperor, we've won.

For now. The spawns of Chaos never rest.

User avatar
Tamriela
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: Sep 16, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Tamriela » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:53 am

1) It's unnatural - The Aids virus is more aggressive and dominant in homosexual cases than heterosexual for a reason.

2) The idea that it's cool to be gay, people choose to be gay because there is no such thing as a "gay gene" which also proves that it's artificial. Cannibalism or torturing your own body is possible and these stuff like homosexuality are unnatural.

3) homosexuality is also related and encourages the party pop culture which is corrupt and degenerate.

4) Toleration of homosexuality encourages homosexuality, the more people accept it, the more popular gayism will become and generations yet unborn, when born will become more homosexual...Like I previously said, homosexuality is determined by the environment you grown up in!
Last edited by Tamriela on Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The United Colonies of Earth
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9727
Founded: Dec 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The United Colonies of Earth » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:53 am

Because Christians are humanocentrists. So am I, but I understand that homosexuality is evolutionarily unbeneficial, so it can't be the orientation of a majority of a species (otherwise it would die out).
The United Colonies of Earth exists:
to encourage settlement of all habitable worlds in the Galaxy and perhaps the Universe by the human race;
to ensure that human rights are respected, with force if necessary, and that all nations recognize the inevitable and unalienable rights of all human beings regardless of their individual and harmless differences, or Idiosyncrasies;
to represent the interests of all humankind to other sapient species;
to protect all humanity and its’ colonies from unneeded violence or danger;
to promote technological advancement and scientific achievement for the happiness, knowledge and welfare of all humans;
and to facilitate cooperation in the spheres of law, transportation, communication, and measurement between nation-states.

User avatar
Veceria
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 24832
Founded: Jul 12, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Veceria » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:53 am

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Ammar wrote:Well now it is.You no longer have a leg to stand on. Besides,how many homos exist on this planet?


There's no way of telling. 2% of the population as a whole is at the low end of most estimates, meaning that as of today, approximately 139,474,768 gay people live on this planet. This doesn't account for transgendered or bisexual people, which would bring the total much higher. So, in other words, One hundred and thirty nine million, four hundred and seventy four thousand, seven hundred and sixty-eight people who are exclusively gay or lesbian live on this planet. That's a rather large number of people, approximately the same as the population of the United States in 1945.

But those are just the official numbers. There are many more who don't state that they are homosexual in official records, or are living in denial.
[FT]|Does not use NS stats.
Zeth Rekia wrote:You making Zeno horny.

DesAnges wrote:People don't deserve respect, they earn it.

10,000,000th post.
FoxTropica wrote:And then Hurdegaryp kissed Thafoo, Meanwhile Fox-Mary-"Sue"-Tropica saved TET from destruction and everyone happily forever.

Then suddenly fights broke out because hey, it's the internet.

Hurd is Hurd is Hurd.
Discord: Fenrisúlfr#3521
(send me a TG before sending me a friend request though)
I'm Austrian, if you need german translations, feel free to send me a TG.

User avatar
Jormengand
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8414
Founded: May 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Jormengand » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:54 am

Raeyh wrote:
Jormengand wrote:And why would that be a good thing? Taking away what has been described as the greatest enjoyment in existence? Surely, the logical thing to do is maximise enjoyment?


You sound like a drug addict. Someone who believes he is unable to achieve happiness except through unhealthy activity of choice.

Besides, if it is the greatest source of enjoyment in existence, it is also the greatest source of agony in existence, too. Even just with homosexuals, look at all these people who now find themselves separated from the rest of society. It would be better if they never felt sexual desire at all.

Sex is unhealthy now? Condoms, people.

That is why you should endeavour to find a stable relationship. Utility*probability functions get a much better result than self-castration (which also hurts, I'm guessing).
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Jormengand
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8414
Founded: May 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Jormengand » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:54 am

Tamriela wrote:1) It's unnatural - The Aids virus is more aggressive and dominant in homosexuals cases than heterosexual.

2) The idea that it;s cool to be gay, people choose to be gay because there is no such thing as a "gay gene" which also proves that it's artificial. Cannibalism or torturing your own body is possible and these stuff like homosexuality are unnatural.

3) homosexuality is also related to the party pop culture which is corrupt and degenerate.

4) Toleration of homosexuality encourages homosexuality, the more people accept it, the more popular gayism will be and generations yet unborn, when born will become more homosexual...Like I previously said, homosexuality is determined by the environment you grown up in!

1) Source
2) Source
3) Source
4) Source
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Avenio
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11113
Founded: Feb 08, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Avenio » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:55 am

Tamriela wrote:1) It's unnatural - The Aids virus is more aggressive and dominant in homosexuals cases than heterosexual.


HIV doesn't care who it infects. If you've got CD4+ helper lymphocytes, you're substrate for replication.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aggicificicerous, American Legionaries, Benjium, Cappedore, Elejamie, Ifreann, Incelastan, Necroghastia, Pizza Friday Forever91, Rusozak, Stellar Colonies, The Crimson Isles, The Two Jerseys, Torrocca, Trump Almighty, Unreasonably Militarised State, Zurkerx

Advertisement

Remove ads