Homosexuality...

[Light]

And to clear up any confusion on the matter. I'm not homosexual myself, I'm heterosexual and engaged to marriage.

I'm sure one of these must fit here.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HaveIMentionedIAmHeterosexualToday
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitlefrc5vfw02fb7?from=Main.NotThatTheresAnythingWrongWithThat
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SuspiciouslySpecificDenial

There is a trope for every occasion, and sometimes there's three!

 

[TheFlyingBastard]

Looks like ProfMTH actually made an update, providing his ten cents on this subject.

 

[borrofburi]

Looks like ProfMTH actually made an update, providing his ten cents on this subject.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEgn7AhHbs4

Oh how I love profMTH... Too bad I'm not gay =/

 

[Story]

That's weird... If profMTH is homosexual, then why doesn't he have a weird effeminate voice?

 

[TheFlyingBastard]

He actually made a video on that as well because he got a message saying: "Are you really homosexual? You don't sound gay. You know what I mean?"
He was not too happy about that.

 

[Nightmare060]

While it does not serve a direct function in terms of biological reproduction, the concept of "Love" towards another human being and the indirect benefits to sociaty do make homosexuality as usefull as hetrosexuality.

For example; If a gay couple adopts a child, they love each other and the child (not in THAT way obviously), the child gets a safe home and is raised by people who are productive members of sociaty, and could potentialy work harder for the benefit of that child and each other.

The same could be said for a love of working in a particular enviroment. If two people work together in the same place and share an enthusiasm for said job, won't they be more productive than a single person who absoloutly hates it?

I see your point in the OP though. Despite it biologicly pointless, the personal benefits do not harm sociaty so you do not oppose it. That in my book is fine, since you yourself are not getting in the way of any civil rights etc..

 

[SirYeen]

... is pointless.

The entire objective of life is compromised in gay persons. I am sorry, but it is true, no matter how happy it makes the individual it helps neither the individual's personal survival or the survival of his respective species. Thus homosexuality is unproductive.

However, seeing as this issue is not nearly as influential as religion (which is my personal rule of thumb regarding thing I am opposed to) and only effects those who choose to partake in it I see no reason to oppose it.

In conclusion, I don't agree with homosexuality because it accomplishes nothing however, I see no need to actively oppose it in the way I oppose religion as it is not create misinformation nor does it pose any imminent threat to the species.
Just don't prove me wrong... comments?

I disagree mate, Everything is determined by the meaning we give to it. If getting kids is your goal in life then by all means do so but mine isn't (although I'd like to have kids later I don't think it is the ultimate goal). I know what you are trying to say : from a biological point of view .... . But really I don't get the point of even mentioning this. It is not about political correctness or anything, I'm just saying it doesn't really matter.

 

[Deleted member 1004]

... is pointless.

The entire objective of life is compromised in gay persons. I am sorry, but it is true, no matter how happy it makes the individual it helps neither the individual's personal survival or the survival of his respective species. Thus homosexuality is unproductive.

However, seeing as this issue is not nearly as influential as religion (which is my personal rule of thumb regarding thing I am opposed to) and only effects those who choose to partake in it I see no reason to oppose it.

In conclusion, I don't agree with homosexuality because it accomplishes nothing however, I see no need to actively oppose it in the way I oppose religion as it is not create misinformation nor does it pose any imminent threat to the species.
Just don't prove me wrong... comments?

I'll start by introducing myself personally here - I'm gay (enough said for this topic).

It's certainly unproductive in the sexual sense (that is fertilisation of an egg with sperm and the entire reproductive purpose). Could is not be productive in other ways, if not already discussed in this thread? There's the benifits as people have stated of the relationship, making people happy and so on. It's also productive to adoption allowing children without parents to have a new start in life. There's a third advantage as well that I didn't see in this thread - conservation of resources.

Bringing more people into the world only pressurises our resources. I've mentioned in a thread entitled "Overpopulation" about how we are already 2 years over the threshold of over-consumption - simply, there are now too many human beings in the world for the earth to sustain, and have been for 2 years - roughly 153 million people and climbing.

So overall I disagree with you. Homosexuality *does* accomplish a lot of things. Happyness, new chances for orphanned children (giving homosexual couples a chance to become a family) and a factor allowing for population control.

 

[mirandansa]

It's certainly unproductive in the sexual sense (that is fertilisation of an egg with sperm and the entire reproductive purpose). Could is not be productive in other ways, if not already discussed in this thread? There's the benifits as people have stated of the relationship, making people happy and so on. It's also productive to adoption allowing children without parents to have a new start in life. There's a third advantage as well that I didn't see in this thread - conservation of resources.

Bringing more people into the world only pressurises our resources. I've mentioned in a thread entitled "Overpopulation" about how we are already 2 years over the threshold of over-consumption - simply, there are now too many human beings in the world for the earth to sustain, and have been for 2 years - roughly 153 million people and climbing.

So overall I disagree with you. Homosexuality *does* accomplish a lot of things. Happyness, new chances for orphanned children (giving homosexual couples a chance to become a family) and a factor allowing for population control.

Yes. And what all those gay-bashing religious people do on the other hand? They are fond of a big family "under God", and, because of their fixation with the notion of biological lineage and "purity" (another reason why they are often racist), they tend to have more children through sexual reproduction rather than adoption:



... which is outrageous. What's more, religious hetero couples are more likely to divorce, leaving their children with a broken family:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
... while still daring to support such a nonsensical crap as Proposition 8, destroying many opportunities for orphans to find new caring parents and form a happy family, such as them:

 

[DeusExNihilum]

... is pointless.

The entire objective of life is compromised in gay persons. I am sorry, but it is true, no matter how happy it makes the individual it helps neither the individual's personal survival or the survival of his respective species. Thus homosexuality is unproductive.

However, seeing as this issue is not nearly as influential as religion (which is my personal rule of thumb regarding thing I am opposed to) and only effects those who choose to partake in it I see no reason to oppose it.

In conclusion, I don't agree with homosexuality because it accomplishes nothing however, I see no need to actively oppose it in the way I oppose religion as it is not create misinformation nor does it pose any imminent threat to the species.
Just don't prove me wrong... comments?

Homosexuality is arguably unproductive in terms of the reproductive desire in the individual but to say that it doesn't help the survival of the respective species is an argument from ignorance or incredulity or both.

Just because something may be a hindrance for one aspect of survival (Ie reproduction) does not mean that there aren't potential benefits that can benefit the group. Benefits that have already been pointed out in this thread (Such as child rearing, limiting population growth etc etc etc)

For example, there are species of insects that will commit suicide (making themselves burst to spray poison for example) to defend the colony. This ability is anything BUT Productive in terms of Reproduction and it is quite obviously counter to the individuals survival, yet it does quite clearly help the survival of the species.

Would you say the objective of life has been compromised in the insect which blows itself up at the first sign of danger? Maybe you would, but you'd be wrong there also.

Besides, you're an argument against your own argument. If things can be deemed "Wrong" or you disagree with things that are "Unproductive" then why the hell are you waffling on the internet? That is anything BUT 'productive'. You're certainly not increasing the chance of survival for yourself or the species by spouting your opinion on a forum. Why aren't you out there doing something 'productive'?