Real Life Forums

Mr.Shroom · Post by **Mr.Shroom** » Thu May 27, 2004 10:59 am

...Its that last one. Them two graphics-only posts kinda hint towards the lacking of original opinions or additonal points of view.

Azurain · Post by **Azurain** » Thu May 27, 2004 9:35 pm

[quote="Mr.Shroom";p="342796"]...Its that last one. Them two graphics-only posts kinda hint towards the lacking of original opinions or additonal points of view.[/quote]
True enough, I suppose. Or when we end up in an argument about the virtues of locking the thread... that might be a good indication as well...

peter-griffin · Post by **peter-griffin** » Thu May 27, 2004 9:54 pm

[quote="confusedcious";p="342668"][quote="peter-griffin";p="342587"][quote="Zaph";p="342403"][quote="Mr.Shroom";p="342347"]I think you've firmly demonstrated that you don't think.

Can we get this thread locked now?[/quote]

Quoted for emphasis!!

-Zaph[/quote]

QUOTED FOR PYRAMID-CREATION EMPHASIS![/quote]

QUOTED FOR UBER EMPHASIS[/quote]

QUOTED FOR SO MUCH EMPHASIS, THAT A MOD WILL SIMPLY HAVE TO BAN US ALL AND LOCK THE THREAD!!

Prospero · Post by **Prospero** » Thu May 27, 2004 10:21 pm

And yet another potentially productive science/philosophy thread goes down the drain.

Angie · Post by **Angie** » Thu May 27, 2004 10:39 pm

I'm thinking that my n00b status is clouding my understanding.

What's wrong with the thread?

user thinks/user types.
same as all other threads

Azurain · Post by **Azurain** » Fri May 28, 2004 12:29 am

[quote="Glue";p="342936"]And yet another potentially productive science/philosophy thread goes down the drain.[/quote]
And for once I didn't kill it...

[quote="Angie";p="342952"]I'm thinking that my n00b status is clouding my understanding.

What's wrong with the thread?
[/quote]
Nothing really, except it denerated into a discussion of whether nor not there were pleasure centres involved in anal sex, then into, well, nothing except bickering and thread pyramids... Of course, it'd be fairly easy for someone, anyone, to just say something relevant or link to some pertinent study showing homosexuality to be genetic, environmental, learned, unlearnable, etc... I think none of us has the energy or inclination to go around looking for scientific studies about the nature of homosexuality, and it's to the point in the discussion where nobody is going to be convinced of an alternate point of view without hard evidence that probably doesn't even exist anyway.

/me shrugs

Angie · Post by **Angie** » Fri May 28, 2004 1:12 am

heh.
do all discussions have to revolve around changing someone's mind? I always found it alot easier to express my own viewpoint, back it up with whatever I feel necessary and then let the other person form their own opinions.

An Open Minded Essay On The Cause Of Homosexuality

This is a pretty non-controversial link.

peter-griffin · Post by **peter-griffin** » Sat May 29, 2004 11:37 pm

artickelle wrote:Few topics are as fascinating as homosexuality.

I beg to differ!

*BBB* ZERO · Post by *BBB* ZERO » Thu Jun 10, 2004 7:36 am

Being gay is wrong; simple as that!!!

Azurain · Post by **Azurain** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:26 am

[quote="*BBB* ZERO";p="349692"]Being gay is wrong; simple as that!!![/quote]
Being an idiot like yourself is wrong. Being gay is perfectly fine.

...

Seriously, if you're going to make such a strong, somewhat offensive statement you'd better back it up pretty well, or be prepared to be flamed repeatedly for your ignorance.

-- Chris

Seraphim · Post by **Seraphim** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:59 pm

Alright, I'll try and make some point, just for the point of trying to get this thread back on track enough that it doesn't get locked, and stupidity like that is just offensive.(same drill as before, if I'm being redundant of someone else tell me, and I'll remove it.)

From what I've read while causes of homosexuality are still unknown, certain causes (The Freudian) have been disproved fairly well. All current evidence suggests that it is a natural thing. Specifically it has to do with the mothers immune system, attack the child during birth(that only applies to males. No such correlation has been found for females thus far.) The main source of this information was Matt Ridley. Genome, and Nature Via Nurture. The mothers’ immune system treats males as an invading organism, and with each male she bears her immune system improves slightly. So with each male born by one mother, the likeliness of a gay male improves. This is not to say that the youngest child will always be gay, just that the youngest child has the greatest chance. Since the chances increase exponentially, if your older brothers chance is .1% then your chance (assuming your number two) will still be under .2%. There are also instances of such relationships in nature, not with homosexuality, but for example, fruit flies and reproduction. Our homosexuality discrepancy still being present is just chance, and a lack on natural selection acting on it.

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 2:24 pm

[quote="Azurain";p="349726"]Seriously, if you're going to make such a strong, somewhat offensive statement you'd better back it up pretty well, or be prepared to be flamed repeatedly for your ignorance.[/quote]
I wouldn't say it's ignorance so much as an unpopular opinion delivered in a rather useless, trollish post.

ReggarBlane · Post by **ReggarBlane** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 3:55 pm

I hardly think that "being gay is wrong" would constitute an "educated" opinion. Sounds pretty ignorant to me.

*BBB* ZERO · Post by *BBB* ZERO » Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:52 pm

hhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm

First thing is first, if you are religious, you can't believe that being gay is okay. God didn't intend for this to happen or everyone would be born with both sex organs; and it didn't matter who anyone ended up with.

Secondly, the vagina is the perfect place to put your ummmm....you know. It is not suppose to go anywhere else. Simply by looking at the male and female body, any four year old can tell you how it is suppose to work. Put two women infront of her and she'll have questions her entire life.

In my opinion, being gay is something I disagree with...

Seraphim · Post by **Seraphim** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 6:03 pm

Many religous zealots misinterprate the message of Sadom and Gamoro(I know it's probablly spelled wrong, I don't feel like checking). The bible isn't nearly as anti-gay as most people think. Also, don't equate being religous with being Christian. Not everyone that believes something is Christian. What else... hmm the bible was written be people, theres a fairly good chance that there are certain things that god didn't agree with, but the people put in the book anyway(if you want proof of this, King James was a pedophile, his version was significantly altered due to this fact without "divine insperation."). and as you can clearly see, theres plenty of places that a male's sexual organ may go, other then a vagina. any 8 year old can tell you that.

Real Life Forums

Gay

Re: Gay

Re: Gay

Who is online