I don't want children and neither does my partner, don't you dare call me not normal and I don't give a stuff if my sexuality is not disadvantage to society S
actually your arguement is completely unvalid anyway, if gays and lesbians where unable to have children you may have a point, however we are as capable of having kids as straight people and many of us do choose to do that. so unless you are saying that if you are not in a hetrasexual family unit (which would make you very conservative) I actually don't think you have thought through this at all S
Weather I adopted children or had them naturally it would not make one shard of difference to me. I'd actually rather adopt even if I was married to man. I don't see how it is a disadvatage to not be able to have children biologically, though women can be artifically inseminated, that's biological reproduction, to an extent. Sure it's important to reproduce but it's more important to take care of all the people we already have produced. I still fail to see where the disadvantage is. Also, you make it sound like all hetro couples have children, which is not the case, so should they be forced too? Becuase we wouldn't want the population declining or anything.
if it wasn't what nature intended, then at some point homosexuals would cease to be and in most if not all living creatures there has always been evidence of homosexuals, you could argue it the other way if you wanted nature makes all manner of sexualities to prevent all sexual acts from making children S
EVERYTHING exists on this earth, in these bodies, for a reason. heterosexuality propagates the species, homosexuality does not. homosexuality is an evolution in and of itself, equally valid and beautiful as heterosexuality. in it's expression of love and desire, relationships and joy, it is something beautiful to it's members. saying something that is profoundly a part of a person's identity and body is a disease needing a cure is purely a construct of your own bias. it HARMS NO ONE, why would it be a disease? it's like saying someone who prefers blondes and couldn't possibly marry a brunette requires "CURING." it's small minded bigotry, pure and simple.
btw, have any of you gay haters considered the fact that homosexuality could have evolved as a way of controlling population growth while still maintaining human being's natural need for companionship and love? that's strictly from an environmental evolution standpoint. people are born gay, deal with it. they are every bit as important to the human species and society as straight people are. god! this is the most irritating conversation ever.
I find this attitude below the most irrating, at lesat everyone else on this thread that feels it should be cured are honest about their phobias
gotcha. damned straight. and a bit of an unevolved opinion there, too. you can't argue evolution without arguing that evolution applies to EVERYTHING.
you are so far away from getting this, homophobes the world wide use the fact that they think we are not normal, to kill, hurt and deny us basic rights that straight people have and while there are still people around that class people as normal and not normal and don't embrace diversity, gay people will still end up getting hurt. now it can be debated if you are homophobic or not, what is quite clear is your attitudes (wether you like it or not) contribute to other peoples homophobic attitudes and you will never know what it is like to be on the recieveing end of that if you are straight S
Actually, his sexual preference is the same as mine. We both like men. So I don't get where it's "different"...
different is fine, we are all different, but anyone who says that black people are not normal are racist, you can't embrace the differences and put a value of normality on it at the same time S
I will make this really simple for you I have white skin, some people have brown skin, are we different 'yes' is ethier of us not normal 'no' S
I know that I am different, there is nothing wrong with that, but you also need to understand that people automatically link the word “abnormal” with “wrong” and who is to say what is normal? To me I’m normal, to you, I’m diseased. First, if they shouldn't be forced too, then why is it a problem when gay couples don't reproduce? Second, check this out. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html So before you make statements, know your facts. Some animals do participate in homosexual activates, but I guess they’re genetics are messed up too. As Sam said, if homosexuals weren’t as nature intended, they would have been weeded out by now, and the truth remains, we are still around. You are suggesting that homosexuality should be cured. Therefore you are stating that there is something wrong with being gay. Stop contradicting yourself. There you go again equating the disease of cancer to homosexuality. This is how you are being judgmental. But by your thinking, if they could cure having dark skin then we should be all for it! I suggest you go back and read the posts made by mynameiskc, she made some very good points. Perhaps homosexuality is a way of population control, that would be a purpose in nature. I don’t have a problem with being different, I have a problem with people equating my sexuality to a disease. There is a difference between saying you are different and saying you are abnormal. As I’ve started before, the word abnormal has negative connotations. I don’t think I am unusual or wrong in liking woman, that’s why I don’t like being called abmornal.
Huh...I just read further back into this thread. whatever876, you've called homosexuality a disadvantage and compared it to being deformed. Then you wonder why people have a problem with your other teminology. Do you think homosexuality is only a human trait? http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm It's not.