Disney airs first ever gay kiss/scene in cartoon

[BigVMan23]

Since sex is for procreation...

 

That may very well be the ultimate intended outcome, but I don't think it's the ONLY function God intended for sex. If it was he probably wouldn't have made it so pleasurable.

[Science Friction]

Even if you do not abide by the moral teachings of Christianity, same sex couples go against nature. Since sex is for procreation, same sex relationships defy nature's laws.

 

Awesome!!!

[bballfamily]

That may very well be the ultimate intended outcome, but I don't think it's the ONLY function God intended for sex. If it was he probably wouldn't have made it so pleasurable.

 

It was to be pleasurable between a man and a woman.

[BigVMan23]

It was to be pleasurable between a man and a woman.

 

Well that, yes. My point was though it isn't ONLY for procreation.

[Science Friction]

It was to be pleasurable between a man and a woman.

 

 

I know quite a few people who are same-sex lovers and they say same sex love is quite pleasurable. If it was so unnatural, you wouldn't think it would be so damn physically pleasurable. Also, we see same-sex love in other species besides humans.

I'm concluding that God, if such a being exists, doesn't give a crap about where Captain Winky hangs out.

If a man and woman love one another, that's a great thing. If a man and man or woman and woman love one another, that's equally terrific.

Edited March 9, 2017 by Science Friction

[True blue (and gold)]

Even if you do not abide by the moral teachings of Christianity, same sex couples go against nature. Since sex is for procreation, same sex relationships defy nature's laws.

Which laws of nature?

[bballfamily]

Which laws of nature?

 

Look out the window.

[True blue (and gold)]

Look out the window.

Which law of nature? Chemistry and physics are my areas of expertise, but I know a little biology. I don't recall a law of nature regarding heterosexuality.

 

If you are referring to animals, I suggest researching that before hitching your wagon to that claim.

[bballfamily]

Which law of nature? Chemistry and physics are my areas of expertise, but I know a little biology. I don't recall a law of nature regarding heterosexuality.

 

If you are referring to animals, I suggest researching that before hitching your wagon to that claim.

 

 

What is sex for in the animal kingdom, other than procreation?

[True blue (and gold)]

What is sex for in the animal kingdom, other than procreation?

I don't know. You might discuss that with the animals doing otherwise.

[bballfamily]

I don't know. You might discuss that with the animals doing otherwise.

 

Just because you might see an occasional cow mounting another cow does not mean they are in a same sex relationship. I have always lived on a farm and never have seen a cow or bull, to put it mildly, in a same sex relationship.

[B-Ball-fan]

Even if you do not abide by the moral teachings of Christianity, same sex couples go against nature. Since sex is for procreation, same sex relationships defy nature's laws.

 

I can see the logic in the assessment that since heterosexual activity leads to procreation, and is likely the most basic reason for sexual activity to begin with, that it's only natural that all humans would be heterosexual.

 

In a scientific sense I have a hunch that the pleasure factor is nature's way of enticing intercourse to further and strengthen the species for survival.

 

If it weren't pleasurable folks might not do it.

 

If it weren't pleasurable, but only lead to procreation, then you can be certain that most people wouldn't do it unless their main aim was indeed to procreate.

 

As you well know lots of straight folks engage in sexual activity with no intent whatsoever to procreate.

 

Pleasure and/or affection often motivate it, and even for some a way for monetary gain, be it the male or female hustlers on the street to perhaps the woman who marries a rich man for her security and encourages the relationship with sexual pleasures.

 

I'm not weighing in on the morality of that, but simply drawing attention to the various reasons people engage in sexual activity all because it is pleasurable.

 

There's no doubt that some gay and straight people have sex for no other reason than pleasure.

 

Now the sticky part of the theory that nature intended for all people to be straight is that throughout history, by no choice of their own, a significant percentage of humans are only attracted to the same sex.

 

Excluding other adventurous folks who might "decide" to get their freak on and experiment sexually by "choice", there are multitudes of humans who without doubt by no choice whatsoever have no sexual attraction to the opposite sex, while they have a seriously strong attraction to the same sex in the very same way heterosexuals are sexually attracted to the opposite sex.

 

Natural heterosexuals didn't choose to be attracted to the opposite sex.

 

Natural homosexuals didn't choose to be attracted to the same sex.

 

Some Asexual humans have no sexual drive whatsoever for either sex.

 

The world doesn't talk much about them, and while it's a small percentage, and they'd rather not draw attention to themselves for similar reasons of social ridicule, they do indeed exist.

 

Some asexual woman will marry and have children to live "regular" lives, but ultimately once they've had children, they'll discourage sexual activity because they really don't want to partake anyhow.

 

For some it's just easier to marry and blend in than to spend their lives answering to everyone else if they're ever going to marry.

 

In the past too, asexual women took chances with their financial security in life by remaining single in a male dominated world, so get married, be secure, have a couple of kids, and be done with it.

 

I'm sure that many of the heterosexuals here can remember when they were first experiencing their adolescent attractions to the opposite sex, and the tingling feelings they experienced that seemed to make your genitals have a mind all their own.

 

You didn't choose that. You were genuinely reacting to your true nature. All of the sudden your childhood games changed, and your new obsession became girls girls girls.

 

This reminds me of the song "I'm a Girl Watcher" when the singer says "I was just of boy when I threw away my toys, I found another game to dwell on".

 

Anyhow, whether or not you really understood what was happening to you, you indeed knew that it was happening to you, and you'd be praised by your friends if you managed to get a date, and maybe get a bit of silly razzing because "wink wink" you might've been getting some. The species encourages and celebrates it to further the species.

 

On the flipside of this a significant number of humans feel the exact same sexual attractions that you felt, but only for the same sex.

 

In this case though most of those people understand early on that they'd be better off keeping this quiet because while heterosexuality is celebrated, homosexuality is ridiculed and discouraged because it doesn't further the species.

 

Because most children keep this quiet they subject themselves to various levels of depression, (which I can relate to), to sometimes heightened levels of self-awareness and deeper analytical observance of society (which I can also relate to).

 

Heterosexual kids are accepted status quo so they might not often be challenged to dissect the ways of human behavior as does someone who knows down deep that they don't fall into the category of the accepted norm.

 

Not only gay kids often have this deeper sense, but just about anyone who feels like an outcast for whatever reason that may be.

 

I've no idea why some humans are naturally gay, but regardless of my understanding of why, or lack there of, the fact remains that whether or not it logically seems to follow nature, it still is very much a true reality of the human condition making it a true facet of nature, and no one really has been able to answer why.

 

Perhaps it's nature's way to control the population. I think that we're now up to 7 billion worldwide, just imagine what the number might be if there were no homosexuals. (Your welcome, I'm doing my part to control the population).

 

Even if you went as far a categorizing it as an abnormality there's really no conclusive evidence that any amount of psychological treatment has ever truly been effective.

 

And why would someone have to change anyhow?

 

Science years ago went as far as castration and shock treatment, and I'm assuming that most by now would agree that that was abusive. Even some more civilized approaches today still prove to just be counterproductive leading to deeper depression.

 

They're trying to shove a square into a circle.

 

If someone were to try to be changed, are they changing for society because they have a hard time understanding it, or are they trying to change for themselves?

 

It might just be my opinion, but it seems rather ridiculous that people who otherwise could just be happy and content being themselves, and who are not hurting anyone else, and who otherwise are perfectly capable intellectually or physically of contributing to society that they should feel the need to expire so much of their emotional energies on changing all because society has a hard time understanding them, and in the end have next to no chance of changing anyhow.

 

If society could be more understanding and acceptant, and acknowledge that it's not a choice, or something that a person deserves ridicule for then they'd be contributing to helping create a social atmosphere where homosexuals can live balanced happy lives free from negative social ostracism.

 

But at the end of the day, while it may seem illogical by nature, it is very much a real natural facet for some of humanity.

 

If you believe that it is abnormal, what might you suggest to ensure that no humans throughout the entire world are ever naturally gay again?

 

I'll wait...

 

I'm assuming that you don't have an answer for that.

 

I have one...

 

Understand it to be a reality that was, is, and always will be, and help contribute to an acceptant society that recognizes that there's no reason to ridicule someone for something that they didn't choose, nor is it hurting anyone, and consider that while it seems illogical by nature that there might be things about nature that we've yet to understand.

[True blue (and gold)]

Just because you might see an occasional cow mounting another cow does not mean they are in a same sex relationship. I have always lived on a farm and never have seen a cow or bull, to put it mildly, in a same sex relationship.

You can choose to educate yourself on the topic or not.

[mcpapa]

As you well know lots of straight folks engage in sexual activity with no intent whatsoever to procreate.

 

 

​WHAT??!!

[bballfamily]

You can choose to educate yourself on the topic or not.

 

Lifetime of education on the farm.