Quote from 420Ace Drake

That was exactly my point. NOW we have the techonolgy, but before 100 years we didn't. If everyone was gay or lesbian it would've been the end for our race. No matter what say, feeling a lust as a male for male or as a female for female, is a brain malfunction. If it was natural, why didn't we evolve with both female and male organs?

I don't know enough about homosexuality to say whether literally is a "brain malfunction," but in this context "brain malfunction" = "mutation," and mutation is and has always been a natural way of life that drives the force of natural selection and happens constantly in our world. Without mutation, many organisms, including humans, wouldn't be where they were today. Besides, evolution isn't perfect, it's more or less an editing system, so using it as justification to show that something isn't right is silly in the first place.

I'm confused about your argument. If you're arguing that homosexuality is wrong and shouldn't happen because it isn't natural, then https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature

If you're simply trying to factually state that homosexuality is a "brain malfunction," then you need to actually provide proof and evidence instead of asking us to prove you wrong.

My proof? Every organism evolves in way so it can survive, right? From the start humans weren't homosexual. Homosexuallity isn't needed for one to survive, so it isn't an evolution. The only left logical explanation is that something with the brain isn't functioning well to couse it.

About the link you provided. In the past, murder hasn't been illegal. Even now, with the rules we have created ( murder is illegal) we still sentence prisoners to death, right? If it isn't good or justifiable by our own rules, why do we still do it? With that this 'appeal to nature' explanation from Your logical fallacy makes no sense whatsoever. It only gives us an idea of how twisted our race really is.

That's is based on how I see the world. Like you said, scientists haven't found out what causes homusexuality so I cannot say that I am 100% sure I'm right. We'll just have to wait and see.

Quote from 420Ace Drake

My proof? Every organism evolves in way so it can survive, right? From the start humans weren't homosexual. Homosexuallity isn't needed for one to survive, so it isn't an evolution. The only left logical explanation is that something with the brain isn't functioning well to couse it.

Are we saying that homosexuality shouldn't be justified because it isn't evolutionarily beneficial? Shit, I guess that means that all people with diabetes are mistakes of evolution and shouldn't be treated as normal. If homosexuality is a result of some sort of biological mutation, the fact that it still exists shows that nature hasn't selected against it.

About the link you provided. In the past, murder hasn't been illegal. Even now, with the rules we have created (murder is illegal) we still sentence prisoners to death, right? If it isn't good or justifiable by our own rules, why do we still do it? With that this 'appeal to nature' explanation from Your logical fallacy makes no sense whatsoever. It only gives us an idea of how twisted our race really is.

How does the death sentence = appeal to nature? Your trying to say that homosexuality is wrong because "it isn't natural," I don't understand how that has to do anything with the death sentence and laws of murder.

We do not threat people with diabetes like normal. If your cells don't operate like normal, the body's cells do not responding properly to insuli means that the person was born with a malufunction. Homusexuality is something new to humanity (2000 + years). Maybe nature cannot select against it because it occurs after being born? But that is what I know, in the first millennia of the human existence there weren't homusexual people, which means that it occured later in our evolution, which again takes us to my point : we were created to be heterosxual.

Many 'natural' things are also considered 'good' and this can bias our thinking: but naturalness itself doesn't make something good or bad. FOR INSTANCE MURDER COULD BE SEEN AS VERY NATURAL, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S GOOD OR JUSTIFIABLE.
We humans created this rule: Murder is illegal. We think that 'murder is not good or justifiable', but we still perform it in 'the face of justice'. For instance a death sentence. My point was that we are either giving it to our primary instincts or our brain cannot process the meaning of 'justice', because we would kill someone to save someone, is that justice? Let me give you examples, we kill for: Money ( most likely when we don't have any and are at the verge of death) ; For our kids or someone we love (for instance if your kid is kidnapped and the only way to save him is to kill someone, you'll most likely do it, but if it was a stranger who was kidnapped and you need to kill your kid for him to be saved you won't do it.) ; if our brain is malfunctioning or what people like calling it, if we are psychopaths. Murder is not justifiable, but we'll use it as a form of justice or a tool to save ourselves or someone we love. This right there are our primal instincs/nature, we care and would do alot of things to survive or for someone we love, but we wouldn't do the same for a stranger. Just like in the nature.
Your logical fallacy's point is that nature isn't always good, but I never said it was. I never said homosexuality is wrong, do whatever ya want m8, I just think that if we were perfect it wouldn't occur. But then again, I might be wrong and just wasting my time arguing. We'll have to wait and see what scientists find about it.

Have a nice day and thanks for taking your time arguing with the shit I am.

Quote from 420Ace Drake

We do not threat people with diabetes like normal. If your cells don't operate like normal, the body's cells do not responding properly to insuli means that the person was born with a malufunction. Homusexuality is something new to humanity (2000 + years). Maybe nature cannot select against it because it occurs after being born? But that is what I know, in the first millennia of the human existence there weren't homusexual people, which means that it occured later in our evolution, which again takes us to my point : we were created to be heterosxual.

Many 'natural' things are also considered 'good' and this can bias our thinking: but naturalness itself doesn't make something good or bad. FOR INSTANCE MURDER COULD BE SEEN AS VERY NATURAL, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S GOOD OR JUSTIFIABLE.
We humans created this rule: Murder is illegal. We think that 'murder is not good or justifiable', but we still perform it in 'the face of justice'. For instance a death sentence. My point was that we are either giving it to our primary instincts or our brain cannot process the meaning of 'justice', because we would kill someone to save someone, is that justice? Let me give you examples, we kill for: Money ( most likely when we don't have any and are at the verge of death) ; For our kids or someone we love (for instance if your kid is kidnapped and the only way to save him is to kill someone, you'll most likely do it, but if it was a stranger who was kidnapped and you need to kill your kid for him to be saved you won't do it.) ; if our brain is malfunctioning or what people like calling it, if we are psychopaths. Murder is not justifiable, but we'll use it as a form of justice or a tool to save ourselves or someone we love. This right there are our primal instincs/nature, we care and would do alot of things to survive or for someone we love, but we wouldn't do the same for a stranger. Just like in the nature.
Your logical fallacy's point is that nature isn't always good, but I never said it was. I never said homosexuality is wrong, do whatever ya want m8, I just think that if we were perfect it wouldn't occur. But then again, I might be wrong and just wasting my time arguing. We'll have to wait and see what scientists find about it.

Have a nice day and thanks for taking your time arguing with the shit I am.

I was under the assumption that you had an opinion on homosexuality. In turns out you didn't and as a result you completely derailed this thread with an irrelevant argument. Wonderful.

A close friend of mine is homosexual, if I had the biased you had I would miss out on being close with that person.

I wouldn't look him in the face and tell him that his brain is malfunctioning and that he's ill, because he's homosexual. Because that's fucking bullshit if I ever heard it.

Quote from 420Ace Drake

Homusexuality is something new to humanity (2000 + years). Maybe nature cannot select against it because it occurs after being born? But that is what I know, in the first millennia of the human existence there weren't homusexual people, which means that

What have I even read...

People in the past rightfully didn't come out as homosexual because they would be killed by the homophobic masses. That doesn't mean they weren't. Likewise, these arguments also apply to those are remain celibate, such as pretty much every Saint and anyone asexual too.

Believing that just because you personally don't affect directly the genes of anything other than children means you have no influence on the gene pool in that area is also incorrect, because grandparents caring for their grandchildren still preserves something of their genes - a potential reason for why humans do actually live past fertility, because the 2 generation pass down of genes suppoprting families with extra carers.

You say it's new to humanity, but finding homosexual behaviours in animals is also quite new, surely not because they all recently developed, but because people weren't even looking or acknowledging that such things, or indeed, people, would be anything other than heterosexual in the first place.

REFER TO MY PREVIOUS STATEMENT ABOUT PEDERASTY BEING WIDESPREAD AND SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE IN ANCIENT ROME.

If only people would read my posts. Homosexuality isn't a recent development, not even close. I'm too hung over for this shit.

Welp

Leviticus 18:22
"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." (NLT)

Leviticus 20:13
"If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense." (NLT)

I believe the answers are there.

Quote from Apex-Predator

Welp

Leviticus 18:22
"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." (NLT)

Leviticus 20:13
"If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense." (NLT)

I believe the answers are there.

I already covered this shit, you guys.

I ask this thread be locked, I'm done fucking repeating myself.

Quote from Jutsu

I already covered this shit, you guys.

I ask this thread be locked, I'm done fucking repeating myself.

What the fuck? You need to cool down man. Why would we lock the thread just because you're "done repeating yourself."?

It's insulting that people wont read my posts that already address what they see as a sound argument, when all they do is ctrl-c ctrl-v whatever regurgitated version of the quote that I've already covered. While I took the time to do the research. Do you not understand why I'm frustrated?

And I'm hung over, so my tolerance for nonsense is at it's lowest right now. So I'm sure I could be more polite about it.

My point is.
A lot of time, care and effort went into those posts. I didn't do all that for them to be shrugged off, especially in the debate section.

Quote from Jutsu

I already covered this shit, you guys.

I ask this thread be locked, I'm done fucking repeating myself.

Sorry :( Jutsu

I just read the OP and replied

Quote from Apex-Predator

Sorry :( Jutsu

I'm sorry too, I shouldn't have been such a dick about it. It's just that I'm at my wits end here.

Quote from Apex-Predator

Sorry :( Jutsu

I just read the OP and replied

Rule of thumb: Always, ALWAYS read the whole thread if you want to participate in a debate. It's not that big of deal in most general section threads, but in a debate, we'd rather not repeat ourselves and go in circles if it can be avoided.