Homosexuality is not natural and is not normality

[Estro Felino]

I hope that the title is not misread. I don't mean that gay people are not normal; I just say that homosexual sex is not natural; of course, love is always natural, whether it is heterosexual or homosexual.

Because, as for sex, in a heterosexual intercourse there is perfection and it deals with something complementary.
So homosexual people (who are born that way) do deserve to fall in love with one another and being in a relationship with one another.
But two gay people are not as lucky as a straight couple. Because there is no complementary sex.
So being born gay is disadvantaged situation, compared to being born straight.
This disadvantage derives from the fact that straight people have a wider range of choice, being the majority. Gay people don't.


Saying that gay people are as lucky as straight people is a very hypocritical and hateful comment.

 

[Nietzsche]

...The ****, man? Really?

 

[Jumi]

I think you are making sex more sound more important than it is. There's nothing special about sex. I doubt homosexual sex is that much different than anything we can experience.

 

[Uberpod]

But two gay people are not as lucky as a straight couple. Because there is no complementary sex.
So being born gay is disadvantaged situation, compared to being born straight.

Gay people have the advantage of mutuality unlike straight people. People of the same gender can be true equals in the bedroom. True givers and receivers. So both gay and straight have their advantages.

Saying that gay people are as lucky as straight people is a very hypocritical and hateful comment.

Odd reaction. Perhaps you derive a lot of self-esteem from a purportedly higher status? and that hurts you when shown to be a trifle?

 

[Parsimony]

You do know what the word "natural" means, right? Something that occurs in or pertains to nature. Humans are a part of nature. What we do is automatically natural. Homosexuality is known to take place in other animals. Take note that "natural" is in no way correlated to "good/bad" or "advantageous/disadvantageous".

 

[beenie]

When there is a will, there is a way. People will find pleasure in unconventional ways, and who are we to say it's a better or worse experience?

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't think "natural" is all that important anyway.

 

[Baladas]

Not being gay (and so speaking from ignorance) I would have to agree with ssainhu.

 

[jeager106]

There is no such thing as a normal homosexual.
What ever normal is?
I'm not anti homosexuals. A persons sex life is none of my business but two men or two woman having sex isn't normal in a world of heterosexuals.
That does not mean there is something "wrong" with a homosexual person, just different from the vast majority of mankind.
If homosexuality is a sin then God will deal with that.
It's not our place to judge or label anyone.

 

[wizanda]

Have a look around at nature; clearly there was something wrong in the design plan then.

 

[Ultimatum]

I think you are making sex more sound more important than it is. There's nothing special about sex.

Naturally (evolutionarily), it is extremely important. It is the ultimate driving force behind where we, as humans, and in fact other animals, are today. Without sex, larger organisms would go extinct..

I hope that the title is not misread. I don't mean that gay people are not normal; I just say that homosexual sex is not natural; of course, love is always natural, whether it is heterosexual or homosexual.

Because, as for sex, in a heterosexual intercourse there is perfection and it deals with something complementary.
So homosexual people (who are born that way) do deserve to fall in love with one another and being in a relationship with one another.
But two gay people are not as lucky as a straight couple. Because there is no complementary sex.
So being born gay is disadvantaged situation, compared to being born straight.
This disadvantage derives from the fact that straight people have a wider range of choice, being the majority. Gay people don't.


Saying that gay people are as lucky as straight people is a very hypocritical and hateful comment.

I understand Hay's point: The female vagina developed to accommodate the human penis, sperm, and somewhat the development of the child inside the female.
The male penis developed to be inside the human vagina and to expel sperm into it to further the cause of reproduction and, in the long run, evolution.

There is NOTHING wrong with being gay and having sexual relations, but just because you can stick a penis inside of something does not necessarily means that it is natural.

 

[Estro Felino]

Take note that "natural" is in no way correlated to "good/bad" or "advantageous/disadvantageous".

no offense, but I find this last sentence very mean to people like me.
Because I was born gay and I feel disadvantaged because you straight people have a much wider range of choice. Because straight people (including bisexuals) are the majority. it is very rare to meet straight people who are single, unless by choice

Gay people are single almost always by choice

 

[gsa]

I hope that the title is not misread. I don't mean that gay people are not normal; I just say that homosexual sex is not natural; of course, love is always natural, whether it is heterosexual or homosexual.

Why would love always be natural? You're already using "natural" in a restrictive way to argue that homosexuality is not natural, so I see no reason to assume that love is natural.

Because, as for sex, in a heterosexual intercourse there is perfection and it deals with something complementary.

By this you mean that one form of heterosexual sex, vaginal intercourse, can result in procreation, presumably. But procreation can also be decidedly "unnatural" (i.e., assisted reproduction), and of course most heterosexual sex is non-procreative.

So homosexual people (who are born that way) do deserve to fall in love with one another and being in a relationship with one another.

How magnanimous of you.

But two gay people are not as lucky as a straight couple. Because there is no complementary sex.
So being born gay is disadvantaged situation, compared to being born straight.
This disadvantage derives from the fact that straight people have a wider range of choice, being the majority. Gay people don't.

What does this even mean? Using your reasoning, the people with the greatest number of choices are polyamorous bisexuals. Those of us who restrict our sexual partners on the basis of number and gender are somehow "disadvantaged," which is ridiculous. I also don't know what you mean by "complementary sex," since it simply means compatible. For gays, sex with a member of their own gender is complementary, and heterosexual sex is not. It is not reproductive, but so what?

Saying that gay people are as lucky as straight people is a very hypocritical and hateful comment.

I don't know what you mean by "lucky," but gay people suffer from no real disability as a result of their sexual orientation or their mating habits. I suppose to the extent that they want to have children, they have to use a different mechanism for reproduction. But that's at best a mild form of disability, and only exists for those who want to reproduce.

 

[Estro Felino]

Gay people have the advantage of mutuality unlike straight people. People of the same gender can be true equals in the bedroom. True givers and receivers. So both gay and straight have their advantages.

seriously...comparing anal sex to vaginal sex is against biology and is disgusting.
what about all those gay men who dislike anal sex?

 

[Ultimatum]

compatible. For gays, sex with a member of their own gender is complementary, and heterosexual sex is not. .

Wrong. Even homosexuals know that MALE/FEMALE procreation, evolutionarily, is absolutely necessary for the survival of any species.

 

[sojourner]

There is no such thing as a normal homosexual.

The behavioral health sciences community disagree with you.

What ever normal is?

Take a look at the DSM IV. Homosexuality is not listed as abnormal behavior. The behavioral sciences community has considered homosexuality to be normal and healthy for at least the last 20 years.

A persons sex life is none of my business but two men or two woman having sex isn't normal in a world of heterosexuals.

Why is this a "world of heterosexuals," particularly? Why isn't this a "world of different sexual orientations?"

 

[sojourner]

Have a look around at nature; clearly there was something wrong in the design plan then.

Wrong?

 

[Robert.Evans]

I hope that the title is not misread. I don't mean that gay people are not normal; I just say that homosexual sex is not natural; of course, love is always natural, whether it is heterosexual or homosexual.

Because, as for sex, in a heterosexual intercourse there is perfection and it deals with something complementary.
So homosexual people (who are born that way) do deserve to fall in love with one another and being in a relationship with one another.
But two gay people are not as lucky as a straight couple. Because there is no complementary sex.
So being born gay is disadvantaged situation, compared to being born straight.
This disadvantage derives from the fact that straight people have a wider range of choice, being the majority. Gay people don't.


Saying that gay people are as lucky as straight people is a very hypocritical and hateful comment.

Well I don't have a problem with most of that I think. Love is one thing, but the act is another., and it is that which is unnatural..., if that is what you are saying.

 

[wizanda]

Wrong?

In context of the topic.

 

[gsa]

Wrong. Even homosexuals know that MALE/FEMALE procreation, evolutionarily, is absolutely necessary for the survival of any species.

Technically, it most certainly is NOT absolute necessary for "any" species, and more to the point, only procreation is necessary for "the survival of any species," but not necessarily a sufficient condition. The idea of species selection is also very controversial. Evolution has no apparent goal or aim.