I have noticed atheists coming out in support of homosexuals. Do some feel that supporting homosexuality is a necessary part of atheism ? Or, do they support homosexuality simply because religion opposes it? What is the attitude of atheists in general to homosexuality? Where homosexuality deserves support and where it should not be supported?
no "j's in amaraic
y'shua translates to joshua
prior to 2nd council of nice there was no "jesus christ"
that council was convened 325 c.e
although this is a humorous attempt..the mere mention and support of the "jesus" bullshyt works to the advantage of judeaochislamians..
which in turn works to the disadvantage of truth.
this urge to "find" jesus is akin to finding the polkaroo or the snuffalupagus or the frikkin smurfs
the sooner we abandon that piece-o-shyt-paradigm, the better.
If you want to discuss sexual pleasure, then make a discussion about sexual pleasure. If you want to discuss adherence to your "social order," make a discussion about that. If you want to discuss atheists' lack of decency, make a discussion about that. It seems that homosexuality plays only a superficial part in much of this discussion and that there are more fundamental arguments you are trying to make. Examples:
Is marriage a fundamental right?
For example, the right for gay marriages? Can this be said to be a fundamental right?
Should consensual sexual behavior always be condoned (despite being legal, if it indicates psychological disorder/if it weakens us as a species/etc)?
Reproductive ability is one important reason for evolution...
I am extremely sorry if my choice of the word ‘disorder’ is causing so much anguish, but I hope eventually you will all realize what I am driving at and will then pardon me for this.
Should humans have sex for purposes other than reproduction?
Reproductive ability is one important reason for evolution and life forms on this planet have been endowed with this natural ability... The family system is created and sustained because of desire for orderly reproduction. Homosexuality completely ignores this...
Should humans have sex outside of legal marriage?
If animal pleasure can be given so much importance, why not legalise extra-marital relations?
Should legal marriage be a part of our social system?
Or, remove the institution of marriage from our social system?
What is the purpose of legal marriage?
...what would be the purpose of homosexual marriage?
Should people be allowed to legally marry if it is expected that they will divorce?
With legalized homosexual marriage, do all homosexuals want to marry? How long their marriages last?
Should members of a community always adopt the most popular moral code (even when they disagree/even when it's undesirable/even when it's harmful)?
Should the homosexuals be guided by some moral code, that may be acceptable to the society they live in?
What is a mental disorder?
If homosexuality can be treated medically, is it not a ‘disorder’?
Should we condone sex acts outside of vaginal penetration by a penis?
The typical sexual practices of homosexuals are a medical horror story:
Their sex practices include:
We do concern ourselves with society’s health.
Should we condone popular lifestyles that reduce life expectancy of individuals? (Note: Homosexual behavior may not actually reduce life expectancy, even if modern self-identified homosexuals do live unhealthy lifestyles for other reasons.)
“The median age of death for homosexuals,
however, was virtually the same nationwide--and, overall, less than 2% survived
to old age.”
We do concern ourselves with society’s health.
Madhukar, notice how all of these issues exist independent of homosexuality. Opinions on these issues will subsequently affect the opinion on whether homosexuality should be supported, but they will also affect opinions on a huge variety of other issues as well.
I like the breaking down of this discussion into separate questions.
atheist support of homosexuality?
why do homosexuals need support?
children need support...
adults should be supporting children...
this cry for support is "gay" pun intended...
religion opposes homosexuality??
okay..it is an understood that religious tenets are generally for the sake of man management.. okay ...
if homosexuality was the norm
you and i would not be included in this dialogue..because the planet would no longer have humans on it...
nature opposes homosexual copulation.
im not sure why simple things are made to be complicated.
hey if a dude wants to shove his penis into a caterpillar in an attempt to change it into a butterlfy
i say go for it..
regardless if I know the err of his way, the ill logic of the action, and the inevitability of his failure, it is not my duty to raise adults.
freedom to choose etc are freedoms that i promote.
there are consequences for each choice though
and if one feels adult enough to "make choices" then one should be adult enough to accept the ramifications/consequences of said choice...
rather simple concept in my opinion.
"nature opposes homosexual copulation."
This is total garbage, The animal kingdom is full of bisexual homosexual and monosexual acts. Not only that but evolution requires a lot more diversity than the simple monsoonal world you suggest. Genetic mutation and then selection requires the exploration of all types of humans ( yes even biggots like you). Your oversimplification is a reflection of your extremely limited intellect ( unfortunately also one of natures other outcomes) I would suggest if any genetics was flawed and likely to be a waste of time it would more likely be yours......
if nature encouraged homosexuality
reproduction through homosexuality would be a reality.
whether or not i condone homosexuality is a non issue.
i condone free choice.
when you find an occurence of reproduction through homosexual copulation...lemme know..
for the record, im sure you are aware of the chromosomal assemblage of humans and how they are derived...
ie xx xy etc...
your attempt at derision or defamation has been noted..
lemme know when you find that occurrence in your "complex" world ;)
You know nothing about evolution and natural selection. genes are more complex than that.
For example let us say that a particular mutation created an offspring that had a large nose. If you then isolate a gene that you find is consistent with this expression you may think that you have found the "big nose gene". However if you then look and find that the individual has webbed toes you may later find that the gene you isolated was involved in growth regulation and was responsible for more than just a big nose. This can and due to the fact that homosexuality exists probably is what occurs. So I am afraid your wikipedia education has yet to take you to the realm of understanding you will need to justify your bigotry.
If the only purpose of sex is reproduction, why do people who don't want children still want sex? Why do people who can't have children want sex?
People with fertility problems want sex. People who have had hysterectomies, vasectomies, and tubal ligations want sex. People who are on birth control or who have gone through menopause want sex. People have sex with themselves. If you're saying that only sex which can result in reproduction is OK, you should be putting all these people in the same category as homosexuals.
Also, homosexuality may be something that becomes more prevalent when a species is overpopulated. Not being able to reproduce is sometimes a good thing. Like now.
Facepalm facepalm facepalm. I try not to be rude but the "homosexuality is bad because if everyone was gay then there would be no people" is the dumbest argument ever.
By this logic can we also demonize all heterosexuals, because heterosexual sex has resulted in overpopulation which is destroying the planet?
Do you have any evidence that only heterosexual people are capable of getting pregnant or getting others pregnant?
I'm pretty sure that if everyone, by some extraordinary miracle, did become homosexual, guys would just donate sperm to women who decided to have children. Kind of like how gays already do.
The difference is, gay people consciously decide to bring life into the world rather than just get knocked up and bringing kids in the world with no parenting abilities, no interest in the children, no resources, and no plans on how to raise them.
Disclaimer: I know I might be construed as putting down straight people here. I am putting down straight people who have children irresponsibly but still think they're special and better than gays because they can have children.
this is one of the most asinine responses i have ever viewed on the internet...
you actually think that parents feel they are better than gay people?
are you familiar with the psychological term "projection"
if you can not pull up and post the segment where i said that homosexual people are less than heterosexual people, please do so..
if you can not, ill accept your apology ;)
heres another quick question...
when was the first sperm bank established?
when was the first successful in vitro fertilization?
ok scroll back 200 yrs...
if everyone turned gay at that point, would you and i be engaging in this discussion?
simple simon says...relax and dont make things bigger than they are...
if everyone turned gay tomorrow...
how many humans would be left on planet earth by 2112?
everyone that makes a choice, should be responsible for it.
if you choose to cop out and deny responsibility for ones choice, and have to go to extraneous means to offset the ramifications of ones choice, then so be it...
just own up and be responsible for the decisions you make...
its rather simple.