@noetic

I dub my cap for you, you made a whole lot of sense even without been rude to the gay. Mazaje is a gay no doubt,

Deep Sight:

I am surprised you still do not see your whole-sale concession: look again at the example you have given: why is the next of kin overridden in that instance. Because the State recognises that he is doing something wrong

And what does the state recognize he is doing wrong? The lack of consent from the other party.

Deep Sight:

Aha!

This is the problem with human beings when they are in psychological tight-spot that leads them to adopt an overly defensive mode. You begin to imagine things that are simply not there. Its called paranoia. Where o where, Mr. Homer, did you see me state that homose.xuals should be considered sub-human or non human ? ? ? ? ?

Oh? Paranoia? And where did I state that? It was a question. There is a question mark at the end. Now who is being paranoid? Did I touch on something?

Deep Sight:

Please take time to read what I am saying and not what I am not saying.

I stated that homkose.xuality is not natural. In defence of this assertion I stated that that which is unnatural is simply that which contradicts what is natural. I stated further that the reproductive instinct alone gives a clear pointer to the fact that what is given by nature is heterose.xual practice. Do you deny that heterose.xual practice is natural? If you deny that it is: state so. If you do not deny that it is natural: then inevitably you concede that that which is contrary to it is not the dictate of nature.

You of course have still not tried to define what you mean by natural. You are about to further compound you problems with ambiguous phrases like "dictate of nature". Mind you we're talking of fully sentient humans here.

Deep Sight:

I do not know what sort of state of mind will urge you to deem a man thrusting into another man’s anus as natural: and proceed to the ridiculous extent of citing isolated and rare cases of similar animal behaviour to state that such is “natural.” In this you deliberately ignore the glaring fact that 99.999999999999999999999% of animals display heterose.xual practice. I call that fraud.

Are you still trying to justify human behaviour with animal behaviour? I already stated that this should not be done yet you continue. Should we also conclude that it is natural for females to eat their mates after copulation? How about castrating the mate after copulation?

Deep Sight:

O, I think when 99.999999999999999% of humans eat food, it should be normal to presume eating food to be natural to humans. Ditto heterose.xual practice. Especially in light of the reproductive element. Nature abhors a vacuum and everything has its purpose and its fit. It is clear that the se.xual instinct exists primarily for reproduction and this is a pointer to the fact that heterose.xual practice is that which is given by nature. Again, go ahead: be so intrepid as to deny this simple fact.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. So if humans have intercourse that they know would not lead to reproduction is such an act unnatural?

Deep Sight:

This simply has to be a joke: As I recall it YOU were the one who cited animal homose.xuality as evidence that human homose.xuality is “natural.” I gave you further examples of other animal behaviour and challenged you to indicate if you would similarly brand such behaviour as natural for humans. You abandoned the poser. And now you revert with this incongruous denial ? ? ?

I already stated that it shouldn't you keep bringing it up so I'm wondering if you feel that it should. Again that was a question. There was a question mark at the end.

Deep Sight:

Paranoia again. Show me where I indicated in any way that homose.xuals should be “trampled and suppressed.”

Oh I'm sorry. So what do you think should be done to homosexuals since they do not fit your opinion of "natural"?

Deep Sight:

No thanks: YOU felt quite free to use the word “natural” in relation to homose.xuals. So define it your self. I have already given sufficient indications of what I perceive it to mean.

No you haven't it's still so vague as to tend to not be useful.

Deep Sight:

You, on the contrary, started with the word “natural,” sought out animal behaviour examples to defend that, and then wound up denouncing comparing animals to humans. Confused?

I simply pointed out using animal behaviour because lots of people keep trotting that out. It was simply factually incorrect. That was the reason for the example.
My use of the word natural here in context is simply that this sexual drive is present in healthy people. Added to that the fact that it has been present in a relatively stable population of humanity.

So you can please go ahead and present your definition or succinct idea of your use of the word "natural" in this context.

Deep Sight:

“Heterose.xual practice” is not Greek.

This does not answer the question. Heterosexuality is about attraction to the opposite sex. Considering the various orifices I mentioned, I was asking if it was natural to have intercourse through them not about the orientation of the practitioner.

amyuka93:

Only God knows how many a$$holes mazaje and thehomer have screwed all their life time?

philip0906:

@ amyuka
ewww!!!u took dat out of my mouth.a man screwing a man*coughs*

I really don't understand how you people think. Does defending child rights make me a child? Or defending women's rights make me a woman?
I'll also like to know what you think should be done to gays. How do you think they should be treated?

indifferent


for all i care, he can turn the country into a Muslim state

while i aint a big fan of the gays, n wont be found promoting or marching at a gay pride parade or anything, i still feel n know that every one under the sun deserves equal treatment n thats it.

st-kris:

while i aint a big fan of the gays, n wont be found promoting or marching at a gay pride parade or anything, i still feel n know that every one under the sun deserves equal treatment n thats it.

Exactly, If you're here in the US you'll understand that what Obama just did will bring a huge sigh of relief to many.

well done obama!

In the same month they experienced the unending oil spill,
Obama deemed it fit to declare a whole month for homosexuals, gays, etc?

when will his 1st term expire pls?

Lets just hope he will last his 1st term.

The cartoon by OlaAdegbu is the best view of our world today. In reality, there is no such thing as EQUAL rights for everybody. The reality of nature on planet Earth as we call it, is that the strongest (predators) will consume the weaker (prey). However, the definition of strongest evolves and so does the target of consumption. ;-)

Firstly, for those who do NOT understand biology, the whole purpose of biological entities is to reproduce and spread. Humans have overcome this biological instinct trend and therefore, in that light humanity is itself an aberration to the natural order. However, carefully note that early religions supported biology with statements like: "God blessed Noah and his sons and said be fruitful and multiply" Gen. 9:1. Do not get me wrong but it would have been very hard to multiply if all the sons were homosexuals. ;-)

The whole silly argument by "TheHomer" to somehow justify that a minority of deviant humans involved in homosexuality is the natural order is not a reality so far. However, since human beings are notorious for bending nature to human whims, the Homafia in the USA [/b]is bending world opinion through the man of Obama to ensure in future it is homosexuals who are the dominant humans that prey on others. And they will use medical advances to propagate their genes, since they are biologically incapable of reproduction with fellow homosexuals of the same sex. ;-)
In the many human cultures of ages past (just like in modern prisons), homosexuality especially amongst males was a power thing. Dominate the weaker male by forcefully R.A.P.I.N.G. him. There was no consent or love. Love as the foundation for homosexuality is a modern marketing tool by homosexual males in USA to show their gentler feminine side and encourage younger homosexuals into the fold. :-(

[b]The NATURE of  Mankind:
Consider this scenario: A hungry lion is kept in the same room with his prey Gazelle and their is no other food for the lion except this Gazelle.
Does the lion refuse to follow his instincts and feed?
Now consider this: A hungry biologically strong human is kept in the same room with a weaker human. Because humans can over come their instincts the human may choose to first kill and then eat his follow human (cannibalism), or wait for the death of one through starvation before stooping to cannibalism, or most likely to both await death by starvation without cannibalism.

Our problem with humans is to identify which scenario will be natural for humans (who already deviate from nature anyway)? All three in my opinion, if I apply "TheHomer"s argument that even minorities are natural. Which is acceptable? Depending on your background, all three. If humans are secular and do NOT believe in an afterlife, then cannibalism is very practical, since survival on earth is the only life worth living for secular humans. Killing is also natural for them, since morality has no basis in secular practicality of survival. Survival is killing your competition and reproducing yourself.

Now let us consider Obesity. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics_of_obesity)

Scientists say it is genetic and unavoidable for some humans. So do we consider it natural? Years ago when humans were poor and hungry, it was unnatural. Today, in the USA in particular over a third of their children are obese. But is discrimination against obesity natural. If you consider most sports teams in the USA, they do NOT allow obese team mates in their starting line up. However, if you consider Sumo Wrestling, then it is unnatural NOT to be obese.

In closing, Africa is not interested in having another form of Homocolonialism taking hold. We are yet to come out of Economic and Religious colonialism and chart our own path. But the USA now wants to dictate what they believe are universal human rights. The very same USA that justifies the MURDER of innocent Afghan and Iraqi children by American bombs rather than risk the deaths of volunteer and well paid American soldiers in hand-to-hand fighting against terrorists.

CLARIFICATION: "Our problem with humans is to identify which scenario will be natural? All three in my opinion. Which is moral. All three. If humans are secular and do NOT believe in an afterlife, then cannibalism is very practical, since survival on earth is the only life worth living for secular humans. Killing is also natural for them, since morality has no basis in secular practicality of survival".

Before "TheHomer" accuses  me of being impractical. Cannibalism is only practical when it ensures the survival of one human at the expense of a competitor human. Since biologically, two males are redundant, it is perfectly acceptable in a secular society for one male to kill and consume another that second competing to avoid death by starvation. Then the surviving male, now well fed, can seek females in heat to impregnate. It is not practical however, for a human to consume his child, if that child is of an age to survive alone. It is better for the child to consume the parent. ;-)

Lest I forget, when quoting the Bible, INCEST was normal at that time, since God only created Adam and Eve, so sexual intercourse between parents, and children and even amongst siblings was essential (Incest is also popular in World Mythologies). But incest has biological limitations when practiced over a long period, since such offspring have birth defects after several generations of incest. However, "TheHomer" should support INCEST, since in a SECULAR society encouraging condoms and abortions, the problems of offspring are eliminated. Furthermore, a father and daughter may be in so much love and of consenting age, that this is only natural by "TheHomers" view of nature.

Soon what happen to Sodom and Gomorrah will in no distant time happen to AMERICA.

Soon what happen to Sodom andGomorrah will in no distant time happen to  AMERICA.

thehomer:

I really don't understand how you people think. Does defending child rights make me a child? Or defending women's rights make me a woman?
I'll also like to know what you think should be done to gays. How do you think they should be treated?

You see how you jst exposed yourself. You can defend child abuse becoz is immoral, but can not defend the abnormal use of the anus. I will thereby ask you what is the biological use anus? In human body every system got its functions. When you start feeding yourself through the nose instead of you mouth. I think you seriously need to seek for a special medical attention, becoz you must be sick in your head. When a man start desiring the anus meant for excretory passage then i think the person is abnormal and should seek for medical attention. He must be sick in the head including those that supported it. As i will recommend a Paedophilia to seek for medical attention so shall i recommend a gay to equally seek for medical attention becoz both are sick in their heads.

MELAA:

Soon what happen to Sodom and Gomorrah will in no distant time happen to  AMERICA.

Exactly. The USA is fighting within itself on the definitions of universal rights. Without religion there is no absolute definition. The right to life, freedom, etc. are all values that change over time. Hence, one day, it will be legal to cannibalize humans for biological spare parts, it will be legal to clone if prefer children to be exact duplicates of yourself, it will even be legal for parents to have intimacy with their cloned children (ie. sex with yourself), it will be legal to transform into a human-animal hybrid as long as that takes place at the foetus stage, which in USA has no rights (animal or human), etc.

Read the latest American stupidity:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/23/connecticut-school-removes-lord-reference-high-school-diplomas/?test=latestnews

Anyone accepting this year as 2010 A.D., however, inaccurate to the actual date of the Birth of Jesus Christ, has already committed to accepting that someone known as Jesus Christ is the foundation for our modern calendar. Hiding the fact with references like Common Era (CE) or Before Commone Era (BCE) is just denying reality, that the calender in use today was inspired by birth of Jesus Christ, despite any inaccuracies in historic dating systems. This is why the Muslims have their own calendar instead of playing with words like CE to represent AD (Anno Domini).

So what do you think will be the best solution to deal with the existence of gay people in society?

Please do not say kill them all or anything ridiculous or barbaric like that. Just because they are different, they are still human beings just like me and you and deserve equal human rights.

Remember, it wasnt too long ago that jews were considered sub human and attempts were made to eradicate them. Black people were also considered less than human not too long ago by many europeans when they took our lands and gave us their morally superior religion which you quote to justify the eradication of another group of human beings. Many non-jews and whites fought for our respective causes.

As a hetrosexual, I understand that homosexuality has always been around and will continue. Lets treat them fairly. I think they deserve the same basic human rights as everyone else, otherwise we are all hypocrites.

Well done Obama. (i dont think he had much choice really)

Realistically speaking, What would you do about homosexuals if you were president of the USA?

Homosexuals, like obese human beings are suffering a biological accident of birth. Society must actively discourage the creation of more obese humans just as they should avoid glorifying homosexuality. Being a biological deviation does does not make it any more normal than cripples born without
hands (yes they do exist). For those non-religious who support evolution, if homosexuality was normal, they would out-number heterosexuals. Sadly, a 100percent homosexual lifestyle would lead to extinction of human beings without natural reproduction. But since a minority of homosexuals does not threaten extinction, they have been left behind by evolution like all other biological mistakes. Nature does not deliberately target loosers, since nature is not perfect. Like an Obese 100m sprinter, nobody wants him on a winning team, but nobody beats him to death either (except crazies).

However, human being who prefer perfection may focus on Eugenics, so that can human beings finally decide if the prefer a new world order of an exclusive homosexuals or heterosexual world. Or leave it as it remains with minority homosexuals and majority heterosexuals. And if we add democracy, with majority rule, then homosexuals are thrown into the closet.

However, homosexuals are still better than transgenders, who deliberate mutilate their bodies to deny their biological form. Hence, LGBT is a handicap to the homosexual movement.

mantraa:

,
Please do not say kill them all or anything ridiculous or barbaric like that. Just because they are different, they are still human beings just like me and you and deserve equal human rights.
,

Basic Human Rights are an "illusion". In reality, the USA considers the lives of American soldiers worth more than the lives of Afghani and Iraqi children.
The Israelis, especially the Jews, consider the lives of each Jew worth 100 times the life of each Palestinian child. That is why when a crazy Palestinian terrorist in Gaza fires a rocket and kills one Jew, the Jewish nation of Israel (notice that is what they call themselves), is willing to deliberately murder hundreds of Palestinian children through direct bombing actions or indirect starvation caused by blockades. Universal rights do NOT exist in our world.

[size=30pt]GAY POWER !!!![/size]

mistermm:

@noetic

I dub my cap for you, you made a whole lot of sense even without been rude to the gay. Mazaje is a gay no doubt,

. . . . .

I don't care about any person's sexuality, as long as it is not preached to me.

One thing I know is that, TOLERANCE is a medicine to many problems. If Christians can tolerate muslims and Muslims tolerate Christians maybe many people wouldn't have died in Jos. And a lot more,

damilola15:

I don't care about any person's sexuality, as long as it is not preached to me.

One thing I know is that, TOLERANCE is a medicine to many problems. If Christians can tolerate muslims and Muslims tolerate Christians maybe many people wouldn't have died in Jos. And a lot more,

Tolerance is an insult to humans that the humanists are using indirectly. Instead of tolerating one another why not love one another? Telling the truth in love will go a long way in healing the wounds in the long run.

do people still discuss this gay issue? i thought its a forgone conclusion. the truth is, homosexaulity has come to stay an its either you join them or leave them with their lifestyle.i usually find its disgusting though especially the negro ones.

A month for immorality, oh my God, What madness is this. Rubbish, nonsense.

@OLAADEGBU

Leave them alone, they are blind.

There is no truth that you will tell them that they will not defy, I'm sure of that.

Well its good so they can rethink.

If you ask them to upload their gay faces now, they will say NO. Not that they don't want to, its just that they can't.

OLAADEGBU:

Tolerance is an insult to humans that the humanists are using indirectly. Instead of tolerating one another why not love one another? Telling the truth in love will go a long way in healing the wounds in the long run.

The truth. . . THAT is the problem. There isn't only one truth. People call "truth" what they deeply (want to) believe in. This truth you talk about is often subjective thus one-sided. The truth of the Christians versus that of the Muslims; Sunni versus Shia; Protestants versus Catholics.

Tolerance is a better remedy to the truth in this case because it accepts differences without having to agree/adopt them.

GudFolk:

The cartoon by OlaAdegbu is the best view of our world today. In reality, there is no such thing as EQUAL rights for everybody. The reality of nature on planet Earth as we call it, is that the strongest (predators) will consume the weaker (prey). However, the definition of strongest evolves and so does the target of consumption. ;-)

OLAADEGBU's cartoon is what you're now using as a good illustration?   I really don't want to waste my time on this.

GudFolk:

Firstly, for those who do NOT understand biology, the whole purpose of biological entities is to reproduce and spread. Humans have overcome this biological instinct trend and therefore, in that light humanity is itself an aberration to the natural order. However, carefully note that early religions supported biology with statements like: "God blessed Noah and his sons and said be fruitful and multiply" Gen. 9:1. Do not get me wrong but it would have been very hard to multiply if all the sons were homosexuals. ;-)

You agree that humans have been able to overcome some of their biological instincts then suddenly switch to religous mythology. What are you actually trying to say?
Are you writing with the opinion that the flood myth in the Bible is actually a factual account?

GudFolk:

The whole silly argument by "TheHomer" to somehow justify that a minority of deviant humans involved in homosexuality is the natural order is not a reality so far. However, since human beings are notorious for bending nature to human whims, the [b]Homafia in the USA [/b]is bending world opinion through the man of Obama to ensure in future it is homosexuals who are the dominant humans that prey on others. And they will use medical advances to propagate their genes, since they are biologically incapable of reproduction with fellow homosexuals of the same sex. ;-)

Are you serious? You agree that humans are able to modify nature to suit them and are also able to modify their biological drives then go off on another tangent about some conspiracy about homosexuals taking over the world. Do you actually mean this? I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

GudFolk:

In the many human cultures of ages past (just like in modern prisons), homosexuality especially amongst males was a power thing. Dominate the weaker male by forcefully R.A.P.I.N.G. him. There was no consent or love. Love as the foundation for homosexuality is a modern marketing tool by homosexual males in USA to show their gentler feminine side and encourage younger homosexuals into the fold. :-(

You are now making false statements about homosexuality in human history. Even if that were true, now that there is consent of both parties, why are you complaining?

GudFolk:

The NATURE of  Mankind:
Consider this scenario: A hungry lion is kept in the same room with his prey Gazelle and their is no other food for the lion except this Gazelle.
Does the lion refuse to follow his instincts and feed?
Now consider this: A hungry biologically strong human is kept in the same room with a weaker human. Because humans can over come their instincts the human may choose to first kill and then eat his follow human (cannibalism), or wait for the death of one through starvation before stooping to cannibalism, or most likely to both await death by starvation without cannibalism.

Our problem with humans is to identify which scenario will be natural for humans (who already deviate from nature anyway)? All three in my opinion, if I apply "TheHomer"s argument that even minorities are natural. Which is acceptable? Depending on your background, all three. If humans are secular and do NOT believe in an afterlife, then cannibalism is very practical, since survival on earth is the only life worth living for secular humans. Killing is also natural for them, since morality has no basis in secular practicality of survival. Survival is killing your competition and reproducing yourself.

Are you seriously claiming that minority groups are unnatural? I think you really need to understand that secular people are not homogenous but have their own independent views on various issues. You are simply committing the strawman fallacy over and over again. I think you need to study something about secular humanism. Here's a nice link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism

GudFolk:

Now let us consider Obesity. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics_of_obesity)

Scientists say it is genetic and unavoidable for some humans. So do we consider it natural? Years ago when humans were poor and hungry, it was unnatural. Today, in the USA in particular over a third of their children are obese. But is discrimination against obesity natural. If you consider most sports teams in the USA, they do NOT allow obese team mates in their starting line up. However, if you consider Sumo Wrestling, then it is unnatural NOT to be obese.

Obese people are not prevented from competing. They are simply not good enough at the sport. It is not surprising that a slimmer and more physically fit person would perform better at e.g a 100 metres dash than an obese person. Do you think the U.S team wants to lose?

GudFolk:

In closing, Africa is not interested in having another form of Homocolonialism taking hold. We are yet to come out of Economic and Religious colonialism and chart our own path. But the USA now wants to dictate what they believe are universal human rights. The very same USA that justifies the MURDER of innocent Afghan and Iraqi children by American bombs rather than risk the deaths of volunteer and well paid American soldiers in hand-to-hand fighting against terrorists.

Is the U.S forcing it on you personally? They are simply giving recognition to yet another group of humans. Attaching "homo" to a word does not automatically make it a bad word. I sometimes do wonder what Africa is actually interested in.
And please stop putting words in my mouth.

thehomer:

---
Are you seriously claiming that minority groups are unnatural? I think you really need to understand that secular people are not homogenous but have their own independent views on various issues. You are simply committing the strawman fallacy over and over again. I think you need to study something about secular humanism. Here's a nice link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism
---
Obese people are not prevented from competing. They are simply not good enough at the sport. It is not surprising that a slimmer and more physically fit person would perform better at e.g a 100 metres dash than an obese person. Do you think the U.S team wants to lose?
---
Is the U.S forcing it on you personally? They are simply giving recognition to yet another group of humans. Attaching "homo" to a word does not automatically make it a bad word. I sometimes do wonder what Africa is actually interested in.
And please stop putting words in my mouth.

Have you heard of "Intolerant Secularism and "Secular Extremism" including violent opposition to religious views?
This is a growing trend and also a strong unifying factor of modern Secularism as practiced in many so-called "Western nations".
Have you heard of "Weightism"? This is deliberate discrimination based on somebody's weight even when irrelevant like a behind-the counter sales rep in a beauty shop.

http://www.cswd.org/docs/faq.html

"Intolerant Atheism and Secular Extremism" as the modern secular "isms" of hatred and intolerance, including the persecution of religious individuals and groups by former Colonials.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1169145/Religion-hatred-Why-longer-cowed-secular-zealots.html?ITO=1490
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=166832

Evidence of American commercial exploitative Sexual-colonialism and "Mark of the Beast" (as if it was not the colonial White-men who tagged Africans "savages" because of traditional African sexual appetites including polygamy, a crime in USA):
Courts in the USA pressured ICANN to finally operate the .Bleep Domain Names for sex addicts,  something European colonials initially banned :-(
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10412765.stm

And finally, I do not take Biblical stories at face value, but I also expose evolution in nature as always preferring large majorities over tiny minorities, even if 10% of mammals are homosexual.

mrmayor:

Mr Obama's Election Promises ( Manifesto)


[size=10pt]Promises about Gays and Lesbians on the Obameter[/size]

No. 290: Push for enactment of Matthew Shepard Act, [/b]which expands hate crime law to include sexual orientation and other factors
"Will place the weight of (his) administration behind the enactment of the Matthew Shepard Act to outlaw hate crimes.">>More


[b]No. 291: Expand the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity

Will "place the weight of (his) administration behind, a fully inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act to outlaw workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.">>More

No. 292: Urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws
As president, "will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws.">>More


No. 293: Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy

Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in the military.>>More

No. 294: Support repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)

Will support "repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions.">>More
Page 1 of 1

[size=14pt]Mr Obama has kept his Pre Electyion Promises on Gays and Lesbians, if you don't like vote Republican next time, or better still let God Strike Him down[/size]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/subjects/gays-and-lesbians/

The proper word should have been Immorality or Adultery month so that we know that humans have really become civilised.

oluagness:

Huuum, may God take control.

God is still on His throne as none of this has caught Him unawares. He reigns sovereign.

amyuka93:

Only God knows how many a$$holes mazaje and thehomer have screwed all their life time?

mazaje and thehomer are the next best persons to answer that question.

philip0906:

@ amyuka
ewww!!!u took dat out of my mouth.a man screwing a man*coughs*

I too wonder why some folks would decide to enter where it is clearly marked exit?  Who knows how many penalty charge notices that they have acquired?

Acidosis:

It Was Difficult For Me To Believe When Someone Said "OBAMA Is An ANTICHRIST", But Now I'm Convinced.

Obama's unbiblical declaration has obviously removed all doubt.