why heterosexuality is natural and homosexuality a deviance

[Carl-Richard]

Let's say homosexuality is not natural. What now? Why are you making the statement? And what's the deal about "natural"? Why is it important?

Edited December 8, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Scholar]

You guys are getting baited hard. What is this quality of conversation, lol.

 

Would have been more interesting if he said incest was wrong, then we could have at least had an interesting moral discussion about moral intuitionism that applies to most people.

[Devin]

11 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Devin

   If you want separate the social aspect, fine, but then if you do so then you cannot answer why homosexuals want sex with same sex partners primarily because to masturbate the masturbator needs a sexual object to sexually gratify themselves, AKA PMO(pornography, masturbation and orgasm). The masturbator can have sexual fantasies involving basically their sexual attraction, without having real sex.

   The attraction of masturbation is to stimulate oneself towards orgasm. Heterosexuals can masturbate to a sexual fantasy involving the opposite sex.

   HOW ARE THE THREE THE SAME?! You have now expanded the category here, so it's not just category error, but conflation of the three together! And of course it changes at the social level, because some who chose to masturbate in social settings, act like peeping toms, or at orgy parties, obviously the masturbation will change with the social setting! But how is that an argument for whether homosexuality or heterosexuality is natural???

Both are obviously natural, OP seems to mean more natural, or the "gods plan" narrative, natural just means expected.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Devin

[Scholar]

You can tell the lack of consciousness on this forum considering that much of the energy is spent on helping people get to the status quo of moral progression rather than being the ones who challenge and question the current moral paradigm.

[Carl-Richard]

5 minutes ago, Scholar said:

You can tell the lack of consciousness on this forum considering that much of the energy is spent on helping people get to the status quo of moral progression rather than being the ones who challenge and question the current moral paradigm.

Who is to say he is not questioning the current moral paradigm?  

[Scholar]

3 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Who is to say he is not questioning the current moral paradigm?  

The person with a brain is to say.

[Devin]

21 minutes ago, Scholar said:

You can tell the lack of consciousness on this forum considering that much of the energy is spent on helping people get to the status quo of moral progression rather than being the ones who challenge and question the current moral paradigm.

You mean intellectuality, not consciousness, which is hilariously ironic coming from someone named Scholar.

[Scholar]

28 minutes ago, Devin said:

You mean intellectuality, not consciousness, which is hilariously ironic coming from someone named Scholar.

I love how my name triggers people so much. None of this is ironic.

 

And no, I meant precisely what I said.

[Carl-Richard]

18 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I love how my name triggers people so much.

It's not the name

[Buck Edwards]

Do you ever debate a topic? You simply left it. 

[Scholar]

16 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's not the name

It's my name combined with my impeccable rationality.

[Danioover9000]

@Devin

1 hour ago, Devin said:

Both are obviously natural, OP seems to mean more natural, or the "gods plan" narrative, natural just means expected.

   What do you mean both are obviously natural, and nature just means expected? Did OP exactly mean more natural, the 'god's plan', by design? Or are you assuming what OP meant?

[Danioover9000]

@Scholar

1 hour ago, Scholar said:

You guys are getting baited hard. What is this quality of conversation, lol.

 

Would have been more interesting if he said incest was wrong, then we could have at least had an interesting moral discussion about moral intuitionism that applies to most people.

   We're getting baited?

   Let's assume OP also brought up incest, so is incest natural and a deviation? Given the Rapid Evolution theory, when scientists observed birds with low population in an Island, inbreeding was the norm in that Island, until a few generations later mutations occurred that triggered diversity in that bird species that increased with each generation past, yet in the 2nd and 1st generation sexual reproduction was in that family of birds, so is incest natural design or a deviancy in nature?

   If incest is true and natural in parts of nature, in different species, then why do homo sapiens have this moral intuitionism of moral qualms with sexual behaviors between siblings or even parents to older siblings? Not just physical, but even in sexual fantasy and sex thoughts that involved family members?

[Princess Arabia]

6 hours ago, Yimpa said:

@Thought Art @Princess Arabia My uncle wanted me to become a priest, but I did not approve of that offer. 

In any case, I would be more than happy to bless your guys’ future marriage 

Nicely put. Keep it in the future. 

[Princess Arabia]

5 hours ago, Thought Art said:

@Yimpa We are not a match ⚠️ 

That's what you think.

[Thought Art]

@Princess Arabia Girl don’t play no games

 

Edited December 9, 2023 by Thought Art

[Princess Arabia]

Just now, Thought Art said:

@Princess Arabia Girl don’t play no games

That's ma middle name. Don't worry, you're safe with me.

[Thought Art]

2 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@Princess Arabia Girl don’t play no games

 

I said Gurl don’t play no games

[Scholar]

30 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Scholar

   We're getting baited?

   Let's assume OP also brought up incest, so is incest natural and a deviation? Given the Rapid Evolution theory, when scientists observed birds with low population in an Island, inbreeding was the norm in that Island, until a few generations later mutations occurred that triggered diversity in that bird species that increased with each generation past, yet in the 2nd and 1st generation sexual reproduction was in that family of birds, so is incest natural design or a deviancy in nature?

   If incest is true and natural in parts of nature, in different species, then why do homo sapiens have this moral intuitionism of moral qualms with sexual behaviors between siblings or even parents to older siblings? Not just physical, but even in sexual fantasy and sex thoughts that involved family members?

You are missing the point. OP doesn't care about what is natural, he is stuck in bigotry. It's as simple as that.

The whole natural argument is just so he can justify his views, if he was a proponent of natural living he wouldn't be on this forum.

 

I am pretty sure animals avoid incest if they have the opportunity to, the same as human beings. But none of that is relevant, because this is all a basic naturalistic fallacy. This isn't even worth discussion, this is like basic shit you should have learn in your high school philosophy class. This should, in fact, be self evident.

 

The reason why I brought up incest is because it would be a discussion that could elevate and inform people on ethical thinking.

Edited December 9, 2023 by Scholar

[Princess Arabia]

2 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

I said Gurl don’t play no games

That's your problem, not mine.