My insutls are just having fun with you dummies. Please reference all the insults by your fellow right wing nut jobs. I guess you just googled looking for anything to respond to my post. You probably unkowingly quoted a known gay hater. Please admit defeat on this subject. There is no justification for hating gays.
My insutls are just having fun with you dummies. Please reference all the insults by your fellow right wing nut jobs. I guess you just googled looking for anything to respond to my post. You probably unkowingly quoted a known gay hater. Please admit defeat on this subject. There is no justification for hating gays.
Homosexuality is a disease.
heatohio's evidence' that homosexual behavior is perfectly 'natural' and 'normal' is -- drum roll -- gay swans. Where did you get that? Jon Stewart? :missingte
Minks eat their young when they are exposed to too much noise. Using your logic, it's perfectly moral for humans to emulate this behavior.
hno:
Newsflash: Despite what your inane Darwinian beliefs may have taught you, humans aren't animals, heatohio. We're analytical, self-aware, spiritual creatures. Animals (and liberals) rely exclusive on their instinct to survive. Humans, on the other hand, are blessed with analytical thinking capability -- they aren't bound as slaves to their surroundings and/or physical limitations. Humans travel to the moon whereas your precious "endangered" bird will never be able to leave the Earth's atmosphere.
Animals (and liberals) are slaves to their natures; humans can choose to overcome them. In fact, this is my definition of growing up:
OVERCOMING OUR OWN NEGATIVE NATURE
Bottom line: humans are the dominant species of the Earth -- King of the Jungle; Lord of the Rings. (Might want to include this inconvenient truth in your next vegan pep talk because your PETA team blows up another animal science lab.)
So with all that said, here are three inconvenient truths the militant homos would rather not talk about:
1) Unlike the vagina, the anus doesn't produce a natural lubricant conducive for penetration. I guess this is why God inspired man to invent petroleum jelly, huh heatohio? Forget swans, how can any sane individual call this "natural behavior"?
2) The rate of venereal disease among homosexuals vs heterosexuals -- and I'm not just talking about AIDS. Gonorrhea, early syphilis, anal warts, the list is endless.
3) The inability for gays to reproduce. From a biological perspective, the meaning of gay life is, uhh, meaningless. Or, about as meaningful as pedophilia if you subscribe to the modern liberal mantra of feelings-uber-alles. I mean, if feelings are your standard to justify behavior, then one can pretty much make the argument for ANY behavior -- no matter how destructive.
Of course homosexuality is a disease -- just like down syndrome. And of course we should lower one of civilization's oldest, time-tested standards -- one man, one woman -- to accommodate a bunch of perverts who have yet to get a grip on their own demons.
Homosexual behavior is repugnant. No society that wishes to call itself 'civilized' should tolerate it.
heatohio's evidence' that homosexual behavior is perfectly 'natural' and 'normal' is -- drum roll -- gay swans. Where did you get that? Jon Stewart? :missingte
Minks eat their young when they are exposed to too much noise. Using your logic, it's perfectly moral for humans to emulate this behavior.
hno:Newsflash: Despite what your inane Darwinian beliefs may have taught you, humans aren't animals, heatohio. We're analytical, self-aware, spiritual creatures. Animals (and liberals) rely exclusive on their instinct to survive. Humans, on the other hand, are blessed with analytical thinking capability -- they aren't bound as slaves to their surroundings and/or physical limitations. Humans travel to the moon whereas your precious "endangered" bird will never be able to leave the Earth's atmosphere.
Animals (and liberals) are slaves to their natures; humans can choose to overcome them. In fact, this is my definition of growing up:
OVERCOMING OUR OWN NEGATIVE NATURE
Bottom line: humans are the dominant species of the Earth -- King of the Jungle; Lord of the Rings. (Might want to include this inconvenient truth in your next vegan pep talk because your PETA team blows up another animal science lab.)
So with all that said, here are three inconvenient truths the militant homos would rather not talk about:
1) Unlike the vagina, the anus doesn't produce a natural lubricant conducive for penetration. I guess this is why God inspired man to invent petroleum jelly, huh heatohio? Forget swans, how can any sane individual call this "natural behavior"?
2) The rate of venereal disease among homosexuals vs heterosexuals -- and I'm not just talking about AIDS. Gonorrhea, early syphilis, anal warts, the list is endless.
3) The inability for gays to reproduce. From a biological perspective, the meaning of gay life is, uhh, meaningless. Or, about as meaningful as pedophilia if you subscribe to the modern liberal mantra of feelings-uber-alles. I mean, if feelings are your standard to justify behavior, then one can pretty much make the argument for ANY behavior -- no matter how destructive.
Of course homosexuality is a disease -- just like down syndrome. And of course we should lower one of civilization's oldest, time-tested standards -- one man, one woman -- to accommodate a bunch of perverts who have yet to get a grip on their own demons.
Homosexual behavior is repugnant. No society that wishes to call itself 'civilized' should tolerate it.
I think Realestatepro should apply to a community college and take some basic economics classes.
I am honestly not trying to be a jerk. I think if you took Micro, Macro, and maybe an intermediate level course you could understand basic markets and it probably shouldn't cost you more than 1500 bucks.
I know you never went to college and that is fine, but if you are going to argue politics and economics, some formal schooling could go a long way.
I am honestly not trying to be a jerk. I think if you took Micro, Macro, and maybe an intermediate level course you could understand basic markets and it probably shouldn't cost you more than 1500 bucks.
I know you never went to college and that is fine, but if you are going to argue politics and economics, some formal schooling could go a long way.
Homosexuality is a disease.
heatohio's evidence' that homosexual behavior is perfectly 'natural' and 'normal' is -- drum roll -- gay swans. Where did you get that? Jon Stewart? :missingte
Minks eat their young when they are exposed to too much noise. Using your logic, it's perfectly moral for humans to emulate this behavior.
Newsflash: Despite what your inane Darwinian beliefs may have taught you, humans aren't animals, heatohio. We're analytical, self-aware, spiritual creatures. Animals (and liberals) rely exclusive on their instinct to survive. Humans, on the other hand, are blessed with analytical thinking capability -- they aren't bound as slaves to their surroundings and/or physical limitations. Humans travel to the moon whereas your precious "endangered" bird will never be able to leave the Earth's atmosphere.
Animals (and liberals) are slaves to their natures; humans can choose to overcome them. In fact, this is my definition of growing up:
OVERCOMING OUR OWN NEGATIVE NATURE
Bottom line: humans are the dominant species of the Earth -- King of the Jungle; Lord of the Rings. (Might want to include this inconvenient truth in your next vegan pep talk because your PETA team blows up another animal science lab.)
So with all that said, here are three inconvenient truths the militant homos would rather not talk about:
1) Unlike the vagina, the anus doesn't produce a natural lubricant conducive for penetration. I guess this is why God inspired man to invent petroleum jelly, huh heatohio? Forget swans, how can any sane individual call this "natural behavior"?
2) The rate of venereal disease among homosexuals vs heterosexuals -- and I'm not just talking about AIDS. Gonorrhea, early syphilis, anal warts, the list is endless.
3) The inability for gays to reproduce. From a biological perspective, the meaning of gay life is, uhh, meaningless. Or, about as meaningful as pedophilia if you subscribe to the modern liberal mantra of feelings-uber-alles. I mean, if feelings are your standard to justify behavior, then one can pretty much make the argument for ANY behavior -- no matter how destructive.
Of course homosexuality is a disease -- just like down syndrome. And of course we should lower one of civilization's oldest, time-tested standards -- one man, one woman -- to accommodate a bunch of perverts who have yet to get a grip on their own demons.
Homosexual behavior is repugnant. No society that wishes to call itself 'civilized' should tolerate it.
Humans are animals--that is just plain old truth missing that thick skull of yours. Homosexuality is just as natural as breathing. Your god fearing mind is afraid to admit your own sexual insecurities out of fear that god will strike you down. Studies prove that homophobes are just closet gays themselves. Facts vs. brainwashed babble? I guess I win.
Homosexual, as well as bisexual, behavior is widespread in the animal kingdom. Animal sexual behavior takes many different forms, even within the same species and the motivations for and implications of their behaviors have yet to be fully understood as most species have yet to be studied.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-.E2.80.98Catalogue_of_Life.E2.80.99_reaches_2-0>[3]</SUP> A 1999 review by researcher Bruce Bagemihl shows that homosexual behavior, not necessarily sex, has been observed in close to 1500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-3>[4]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Biological_Exuberance:_Animal_4-0>[5]</SUP>
The naturalness of homosexuality in non-human animals is considered controversial by conservative religious groups who oppose LGBT social movements because it points to the naturalness of homosexuality in humans.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Love_That_Dare_Not_Squeak_5-0>[6]</SUP> Whether this has logical or ethical implications is also a source of debate, with some arguing that it is illogical to use animal behavior to justify what is or is not moral (see appeal to nature).<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Love_That_Dare_Not_Squeak_5-1>[6]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-The_Animal_Homosexuality_Myth_6-0>[7]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Defending_A_Higher_Law_7-0>[8]</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>Humans are animals, this is scientific fact.</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
Biologically, most definitely yes.
Before exploring whether humans are animals, you have to understand what is meant by the terms you're using.
'Animal' is a word with a certain biological definition. Dictionary.com describes an animal to be "A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure."
For the bio-linguistically inept amongst us (myself included) a human adheres to all the qualities that are demanded for a thing to be termed an 'animal'. Almost all sensible dictionaries, encyclopaedias and biology text books agree in this aspect of the debate.
However, although, overwhelmingly, a human is most definitely an animal in biological terms, I have come across definitions which loosely claim the biological requirements, then fumblingly tack on the end..."excluding humans."
Linguistically, we often use "animal" to term a creature that is not human, and the definition is exclusively not human because it's easier in conversation. For example, you don't see "Animal Hospital, Excluding Humans" or the RSPCA(EH) "Royal society for the Protection of Animals (Excluding Humans)". (Being British and severely narrow minded I apologise that my analogies are confined to one side of the Atlantic) But yeah.
The naturalness of homosexuality in non-human animals is considered controversial by conservative religious groups who oppose LGBT social movements because it points to the naturalness of homosexuality in humans.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Love_That_Dare_Not_Squeak_5-0>[6]</SUP> Whether this has logical or ethical implications is also a source of debate, with some arguing that it is illogical to use animal behavior to justify what is or is not moral (see appeal to nature).<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Love_That_Dare_Not_Squeak_5-1>[6]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-The_Animal_Homosexuality_Myth_6-0>[7]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Defending_A_Higher_Law_7-0>[8]</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>Humans are animals, this is scientific fact.</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
Biologically, most definitely yes.
Before exploring whether humans are animals, you have to understand what is meant by the terms you're using.
'Animal' is a word with a certain biological definition. Dictionary.com describes an animal to be "A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure."
For the bio-linguistically inept amongst us (myself included) a human adheres to all the qualities that are demanded for a thing to be termed an 'animal'. Almost all sensible dictionaries, encyclopaedias and biology text books agree in this aspect of the debate.
However, although, overwhelmingly, a human is most definitely an animal in biological terms, I have come across definitions which loosely claim the biological requirements, then fumblingly tack on the end..."excluding humans."
Linguistically, we often use "animal" to term a creature that is not human, and the definition is exclusively not human because it's easier in conversation. For example, you don't see "Animal Hospital, Excluding Humans" or the RSPCA(EH) "Royal society for the Protection of Animals (Excluding Humans)". (Being British and severely narrow minded I apologise that my analogies are confined to one side of the Atlantic) But yeah.
BBL is frustrated: Why do you think we Republicans have such disdain for the public school system? Because it's cheating us out of qualified workmen and future cutomers. Those kids in Detroit and other cities who are dropping out of school......
SH: Here's a news flash BB - those loser kids who drop out of the public school system would also drop out and fail in a private school system. If they don't care enough or are not sufficiently motivated by their parents to succeed in the public school system, they will get smashed in any privately operated system.
SH: Here's a news flash BB - those loser kids who drop out of the public school system would also drop out and fail in a private school system. If they don't care enough or are not sufficiently motivated by their parents to succeed in the public school system, they will get smashed in any privately operated system.
BBL explains the birds & bees: And before you go there, there's a vast difference between kisses that show affection and kisses that are that are foreplay.
SH: Ayuh, and there's some reports coming in that Mrs BBL would sure prefer you quit boring her with the former and start getting back to giving her some of the latter.
So come on brother...stop burning time lecturing gambling fiends with your crusty moral relativity lessons and go put a long overdue spring into your woman's step.....
SH: Ayuh, and there's some reports coming in that Mrs BBL would sure prefer you quit boring her with the former and start getting back to giving her some of the latter.
So come on brother...stop burning time lecturing gambling fiends with your crusty moral relativity lessons and go put a long overdue spring into your woman's step.....
Probably better to just kill 'em all off, eh Markie?
Posts like these further the perception that you were the subject of aggressive physical abuse from either your mother, your father or both.
Give up those painful memories and grow up. There's a big happy world out here that you can thrive in without being haunted by your childhood fears.
Thanks to DP, I now know that REP is an Homoparanoid, thinking that everyone who doesn't accept his version of the "truth" is out to get him.
I'm sure he'll figure it out when he grows up.
What a great word homoparanoid is - it more or less explains in a few sylables what the hate crowd is all about.
I'm sure he'll figure it out when he grows up.
What a great word homoparanoid is - it more or less explains in a few sylables what the hate crowd is all about.
