Homosexuality selected because of societal function

[Quetzal]

The only one trapped in a corner is YOU for trying to justify that which is a perversion of nature. Remember me saying all nature is corrupted ?

opcorn: You still don't get it, it's okay. I'll wait.

One of your responses was- You are assuming that homosexuality is a distortion of nature, when it occurs naturally with other animals.

Actually, my argument is the exact opposite when we begin to discuss homosexuality outside of our own species.

Same sex in animals or humans is perversion.

That is one opinion.

(I snipped the rest because it was a religious rambling I prefer to avoid)

 

[dodge]

Quetzal;4798564]opcorn: You still don't get it, it's okay. I'll wait.

I get it you love your sin more than truth.

(I snipped the rest because it was a religious rambling I prefer to avoid)

You snipped the rest because it exposes that you cannot deal with the truth,sadly.

 

[Quetzal]

I get it you love your sin more than truth.



You snipped the rest because it exposes that you cannot deal with the truth,sadly.

When you are ready to get back on the topic at hand, let me know. I will be around.

 

[glassjester]

It was only a matter of time, really. Has anyone told you that you are predictable? Might want to change it up sometimes. Keeps us godless heathens on our toes.

Seriously? That's off-topic?

Alright, Brother.

If we're discussing whether homosexuality is a disordered desire, then we have to first agree on whether or not any desires are disordered, and what makes them so.

So do you think any sexual desire could be considered disordered, or not?

 

[Quetzal]

Seriously? That's off-topic?

Alright, Brother.

If we're discussing whether homosexuality is a disordered desire, then we have to first agree on whether or not any desires are disordered, and what makes them so.

So do you think any sexual desire could be considered disordered, or not?

We can't even go that far yet. First, I need you to define was a sexual disorder is.

 

[glassjester]

We can't even go that far yet. First, I need you to define was a sexual disorder is.

When someone's sexual desires aren't working right.

 

[Quetzal]

When someone's sexual desires aren't working right.

What sexual desires are right? How would you define "right"?

 

[glassjester]

What sexual desires are right? How would you define "right"?

That's my question to you.

Do you consider it even possible for someone's sexual desire to be not working right?

...Or can they desire to have sex with absolutely anything and anyone, without it being considered (by you) to be disordered?

 

[Quetzal]

That's my question to you.

Do you consider it even possible for someone's sexual desire to be not working right?

Yep.

 

[glassjester]

Yep.

Ok.

So we've got a basis for a discussion.

What would make a particular sexual desire disordered or not?

 

[Quetzal]

Ok.

So we've got a basis for a discussion.

What would make a particular sexual desire disordered or not?

If the sexual desire is harmful to others within the society in question.

 

[glassjester]

If the sexual desire is harmful to others within the society in question.

Alright.

Other people, you mean?

 

[Quetzal]

Alright.

Other people, you mean?

Right, we are talking about social constructs that only exist with people.

 

[glassjester]

Right, we are talking about social constructs that only exist with people.

So sexual desires that harm oneself, or the desire for sex with inanimate objects, animals, or corpses - you wouldn't consider any of that to be disordered?

Acting on those desires wouldn't harm any others, after all.

 

[Quetzal]

So sexual desires that harm oneself, or the desire for sex with inanimate objects, animals, or corpses - you wouldn't consider any of that to be disordered?

Acting on those desires wouldn't harm any others, after all.

I am tired of having this dance with you every time this comes up. You change the topic, bait and switch and then make unrelated comparisons to try to "trap" me. No dice. If you have a relevant point to the topic, say it. Otherwise, I have better things to do.

 

[glassjester]

I am tired of having this dance with you every time this comes up.

With me?

I don't believe you and I have discussed this before.

 

[glassjester]

Anyway. You say what distinguishes a disordered sexual desire from a properly functioning sexual desire is whether it harms others or not.

I believe I've shown that to be a severely lacking grounding of sexual ethics.

I realize you chose that particular line in the sand because it allows you to consider homosexuality as "not disordered."
But it also defines necrophilia and bestiality as "not disordered."

You may wish to draw the boundary between disordered sexual desire and properly functioning sexual desire elsewhere.

If I've misunderstood your distinction between disordered and non-disordered sexual desire, then please correct me.

 

[Crucible]

My mind also likes evidence and logic...so it's no wonder I laugh every time you tell me the "truths" you know about orientation.

I laugh every time a shackled liberal man or a dumb liberal woman sits there and makes claim to the contrary which has been the case for the entire history of mankind before them. You're the one who needs the evidence, and you have none.

 

[dodge]

If the sexual desire is harmful to others within the society in question.

You do not consider a man putting his male part in fecal matter harmful , or a man placing his male part in another mans mouth harmful ?

The last study I read said same sex males, who are in a relationship, have an average of 200 different SEXUAL PARTNERS A YEAR ! SO obviously it is about lust and not love.

 

[glassjester]

The last study I read said same sex males, who are in a relationship, have an average of 200 different SEXUAL PARTNERS A YEAR !

This is not an objection to homosexuality, itself, just a complaint about promiscuity.
But then again, the liberal crowd does not see promiscuity as immoral either.