Arguments against homosexuality being natrual

I think its natural, if its not natural there won't be any gays today or in the past.

But like @Madmick said who cares if it is natural or not.
 
That's not an good argument cause "consent" is a social constract.

Society decides who/what can consent.

If a 12 year old girl wants to have sex with 45 year old man, are you gonna consider her opinion or just dismiss it cause you don't agree with adults having sex with teens?

The same way you say kids n animals "can't consent", someone who opposes homosexuality can say the same thing.

That is a good point, however, one could use that argument for many things that we deem acceptable / unacceptable as social construct.

A relationship between two adults who are fully capable of understanding their actions is a far cry from a 12 year old that is still developing mentally. The later can cause serious damage to someone a child that is not fully mentally developed
 
They can't. But there problems are mostly mental than std. Joining the feminist movement, promoting abortion and chanting Allahu Akbar to stand alongside with Islam.


there's crazy straight people too. I don't paint with so broad a brush.
Many lesbians prefer to go to Home Depot on the weekend, fix up the house and chill with their woman, bothering no one.
 
The gay genes thing was debunked like a decade ago. Many cases of identical twins (same genes) but one is gay and the other is straight.

So now they are looking at other things.
So gay genes keep being passed by heteros and only combine sometimes to create gays.
 
There's should be a thread "The Benefits of a Gay Male Relationship" lol

1. Two male incomes
2. Someone in the house can cook
 
Similar groups to the tranny movement that's got medicine saying to put kids on puberty blockers and estrogen.

You're literally making things up (as usual) to fit your fucked up natrative. There is no large, concerted effort to make pedophilia legal.

You do this alllll the time, Rip. It's so disingenuous. That's why you always use vague terminology such as "they" "them" "they're".
 
You're literally making things up (as usual) to fit your fucked up natrative. There is no large, concerted effort to make pedophilia legal.

You do this alllll the time, Rip. It's so disingenuous. That's why you always use vague terminology such as "they" "them" "they're".

@ripskater is more paranoid about LGBQ individuals then McCarthy was about Communist.
 
You're literally making things up (as usual) to fit your fucked up natrative. There is no large, concerted effort to make pedophilia legal.

You do this alllll the time, Rip. It's so disingenuous. That's why you always use vague terminology such as "they" "them" "they're".
I'm not making it up. It has been discussed. I look for LGBTQ to add it someday. Just like the Tranny agenda recently.
 
Who is "they"?
There are a few trying to push the narrative, but it's not a majority or anything.

Some "psychologist" did a AMA on reddit. But they didn't reveal their identity, so there's not much to go on.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...al-psychologist-child-sex-abuse-a6965956.html

It was "accidentally" placed in the APA manual for mental illness as a "sexual orientation", which was retracted after gigantic uproar from the media and the internet community.

Pedophilia is not a “sexual orientation,” and erroneous use of that phrase will be corrected soon in its new manual on mental illnesses, the American Psychiatric Association said Thursday.

The APA’s statement came in response to media inquiries, including from The Washington Times, about an uproar on the Internet that the APA had designated pedophilia as a sexual orientation in its new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, known as DSM-5 or DSM-V.

About a week ago, a blog called NeonTommy, produced at Annenberg Digital News at the University of Southern California, said the APA had drawn a “very distinct line” between pedophilia and pedophilic disorder in its new manual.

According to the DSM-5, pedophilia “refers to a sexual orientation or profession of sexual preference devoid of consummation, whereas pedophilic disorder is defined as a compulsion and is used in reference to individuals who act on their sexuality,” NeonTommy wrote.

The item was picked up and circulated on countless other Internet sites. Many bloggers bashed the APA for “mainstreaming” deviance and capitulating to pro-pedophile groups. Others tied it to gay issues — one wag wrote that it was “time to change the LGBT letterhead to LGBT&P.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/apa-correct-manual-clarification-pedophilia-not-se/

There are more people pushing the agenda than I would believe, tbh.



http://www.theblaze.com/news/2011/0...ychologists-push-to-decriminalize-pedophilia/
 
Whether it is natural says nothing about its merit. I don't have a problem with homosexuality so homosexuals don't have to justify their lifestyle to me. Nobody cares why I am straight. Something is not wrong or right because it happens in nature.

If the Nazis came up with the cure for cancer would we deny it because it came from the Nazis? Or test it on its merit? The origins of things do not matter.
 
I'm not making it up. It has been discussed. I look for LGBTQ to add it someday. Just like the Tranny agenda recently.

08c559ae3fe67ee41ec17feef44d66e0e51f807d47c7d095ae6557e0aa7d6731.jpg
 
Only way i can personally understand homosexuality is to assume someone is wired wrong. Otherwise it makes no sense.
 
Homosexuality is not "natural" because it does not occur in nature.

Male animals do not prefer to mate with their some sex. Just when the drive to mate many will try to hump anything they can if they can't get to a female.

It's a poor argument.

Yes it's a deviation from normal but why worry bout it, people are complicated and let people be with who they want.
 
There are a few trying to push the narrative, but it's not a majority or anything.

Some "psychologist" did a AMA on reddit. But they didn't reveal their identity, so there's not much to go on.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...al-psychologist-child-sex-abuse-a6965956.html

It was "accidentally" placed in the APA manual for mental illness as a "sexual orientation", which was retracted after gigantic uproar from the media and the internet community.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/apa-correct-manual-clarification-pedophilia-not-se/

There are more people pushing the agenda than I would believe, tbh.



http://www.theblaze.com/news/2011/0...ychologists-push-to-decriminalize-pedophilia/


That's some fringe group and a single guy on Reddit. Rip said that he believes thereally will be a push for it to become legal. In order for that to occur, there needs to be a concerted effort made by a large number of people. That simply isn't happening.
 
Back
Top