Gay Adoption (8 Viewers)

Klin

نحن الروبوتات
May 27, 2009
61,697
Is technology natural as in does it occur in nature because homosexual sex does. How is technology more "natural"?

It's not natural really just means you aren't comfortable with it.
Why are we comparing technology to homosexual sex now?

Homosexual sex is not natural. Humans were not created to live life, have sex with same sex if necessary, and then just die.
 

X Æ A-12

Senior Member
Contributor
Sep 4, 2006
88,241
Why are we comparing technology to homosexual sex now?

Homosexual sex is not natural. Humans were not created to live life, have sex with same sex if necessary, and then just die.
My point is that I don't see why you care what fits your definition of natural so much. Seems kind of pointless to me.
 

AndreaCristiano

Nato, Vive, e muore Italiano
Jun 9, 2011
19,471
And reproduce we have. In fact we are doing too well and overpopulating.

If anything less babies is probably better in most countries.
Over population is a fallicy. Were aren't over poplulated we just have to much of the world under horrible governments which waste natural resources and keep their populace in poverty
 

Klin

نحن الروبوتات
May 27, 2009
61,697
My point is that I don't see why you care what fits your definition of natural so much. Seems kind of pointless to me.
It's not just my definition. Male humans weren't created with a penis as an ornament. Female humans weren't created with a vagina to get stuffed by a strap-on.
 

Klin

نحن الروبوتات
May 27, 2009
61,697
Even if they are not, even if they "choose" to be, their choice occurs in nature, through natural processes of thinking (something many here do not actually do) and is, hence natural.
By that statement, everything we all do is natural.
 

Zlatan

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2003
23,049
Your statement about what many not thinking shows your arrogance. Just because people don't agree with you doesn't make them idiots

Maybe not idiots but certainly people who dont really think or care about others and are closeminded. Like I said, classic example of "first they came for the jews..." Easy to talk how somebody else shouldnt have some rights when you have all those rights...

It's progressive, liberal people who have pushed the world forward and who have given an effort to change the world instead of staying in the same place, keeping the status quo.
 

AndreaCristiano

Nato, Vive, e muore Italiano
Jun 9, 2011
19,471
Maybe not idiots but certainly people who dont really think or care about others and are closeminded. Like I said, classic example of "first they came for the jews..." Easy to talk how somebody else shouldnt have some rights when you have all those rights...

It's progressive, liberal people who have pushed the world forward and who have given an effort to change the world instead of staying in the same place, keeping the status quo.
Really? In america conservatives freed the slaves and gave women the right to vote. So what about those liberals? Also once again your arrogant talking about how people who dissagree with you don't think it care about people.
 

Zlatan

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2003
23,049
Really? In america conservatives freed the slaves and gave women the right to vote. So what about those liberals? Also once again your arrogant talking about how people who dissagree with you don't think it care about people.

I actually do agree with you, I am arrogant in many ways. However, in this case my arrogance leads me to wish to give more rights and freedoms to people instead of discriminating against them, while your humbelness leads you to deny those same people rights and freedoms others enjoy.

Now, which sounds better to you? If wanting to give people more rights so they can live happier and more fulfilled lives is while thinking those who deny those rights are closeminded is arrogance, then yes, I am very arrogant.

And yes, I do think you (not you personally, but the whole anti-homosexual camp) is very closeminded and doesnt really have an idea what it is like to be discriminated against.

Human rights should not be selective. They should be for everybody. Remember that next time you feel you are discriminated against in some way. Discrimination is always about being different, regardless of what that difference is, whether its skin color, ethnicty, sexdual orientation, age or something else.

Remember that next time you think you are discriminated because you are different on some grounds and then remember you are doing the same thing.
 

Zlatan

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2003
23,049
Really? In america conservatives freed the slaves and gave women the right to vote. So what about those liberals? Also once again your arrogant talking about how people who dissagree with you don't think it care about people.

I do not know if you are talking bout politically conservative, republican/conservative political parties or what, but:

lib·er·al/ˈlib(ə)rəl/
Adjective: Open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.


Therefore, somebldy that discarded traditional values (slavery) and changed the traditional behaviour is by definition liberal.


con·serv·a·tive/kənˈsərvətiv/
Adjective: Holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in politics or religion.


WHile somebdy that tried to keep hold of old traditional ways of life (slavery) would be conservative.


Therefore somebody that changed the traditional ways cannot, by definition, be conservative. Sou can not be for the radical changing of society and be a conservative, because that is the very opposite of the definition of conservative.
 

AndreaCristiano

Nato, Vive, e muore Italiano
Jun 9, 2011
19,471
I actually do agree with you, I am arrogant in many ways. However, in this case my arrogance leads me to wish to give more rights and freedoms to people instead of discriminating against them, while your humbelness leads you to deny those same people rights and freedoms others enjoy.

Now, which sounds better to you? If wanting to give people more rights so they can live happier and more fulfilled lives is while thinking those who deny those rights are closeminded is arrogance, then yes, I am very arrogant.

And yes, I do think you (not you personally, but the whole anti-homosexual camp) is very closeminded and doesnt really have an idea what it is like to be discriminated against.

Human rights should not be selective. They should be for everybody. Remember that next time you feel you are discriminated against in some way. Discrimination is always about being different, regardless of what that difference is, whether its skin color, ethnicty, sexdual orientation, age or something else.

Remember that next time you think you are discriminated because you are different on some grounds and then remember you are doing the same thing.
Well thanks for taking me out if that camp. I as you know am not against their adoption so I do not fit in that discussion. I just point out that when one dismisses the other side without respectful discourse it minimizes the discussion. Did you ever think that possibly if you guys didn't call those in the opposition names or question them as humans they may listen to your reasoning?
 

AndreaCristiano

Nato, Vive, e muore Italiano
Jun 9, 2011
19,471
I do not know if you are talking bout politically conservative, republican/conservative political parties or what, but:

lib·er·al/ˈlib(ə)rəl/
Adjective: Open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.


Therefore, somebldy that discarded traditional values (slavery) and changed the traditional behaviour is by definition liberal.


con·serv·a·tive/kənˈsərvətiv/
Adjective: Holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in politics or religion.


WHile somebdy that tried to keep hold of old traditional ways of life (slavery) would be conservative.


Therefore somebody that changed the traditional ways cannot, by definition, be conservative. Sou can not be for the radical changing of society and be a conservative, because that is the very opposite of the definition of conservative.
So then how did the conservative Lincoln free the slaves or the conservative Republicans give women rights to vote. Do you know that the first black congressmen in the US were conservative Republicans not liberal Democrats.
 

Zlatan

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2003
23,049
Well thanks for taking me out if that camp. I as you know am not against their adoption so I do not fit in that discussion. I just point out that when one dismisses the other side without respectful discourse it minimizes the discussion. Did you ever think that possibly if you guys didn't call those in the opposition names or question them as humans they may listen to your reasoning?

So let me get this straight... you've been arguing for 80 pages that gays should not adopt... yet you are for gay adoption? :shifty:


And plenty of good, rational arguments have been made without any name calling, but it all ends up in the same way from the other side: comparations with pedophilia, beastiality, etc, how it is not natural, how it is against religion, etc... It is very difficult to reason when you have to explain, for example, the concept of consent over and over again.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 8)