174 cr points
Send Message:   17 / F
 Offline
|
Gay marriage is not acceptable. That is ridiculous. To legalise gay marriage is to proclaim that being gay is okay! What will the future be where kids see gay couples and think it's normal! Lala thinks homosexuality should be kept secret from the public.
|
|
|
LalaSatalin wrote:
Gay marriage is not acceptable. That is ridiculous. To legalise gay marriage is to proclaim that being gay is okay! What will the future be where kids see gay couples and think it's normal! Lala thinks homosexuality should be kept secret from the public. Tell that to Mother Nature, which creates homosexuality and heterosexuality without bias. You self-righteous bigot. Who's determined to make children afraid of all the diverse human sexuality with your irrational homophobia, and possibly themselves if they just happened to be born as homosexuals.
And before you even try to get onto my case as some sorta petty revenge scheme, I'm a heterosexual who doesn't need you to defend my rights to get married. Especially when you're a narcissist who refers herself in third person, like someone who would talk like an egotistical pro-wrestler because she believes that she somehow deserves more attention and adoration over others. That might looks cute with 2 years old, but you're just annoyingly egocentric.
|
174 cr points
Send Message: 17 / F
Offline
|
DomFortress wrote:
Tell that to Mother Nature, which creates homosexuality and heterosexuality without bias. You self-righteous bigot. Who's determined to make children afraid of all the diverse human sexuality with your irrational homophobia, and possibly themselves if they just happened to be born as homosexuals.
And before you even try to get onto my case as some sorta petty revenge scheme, I'm a heterosexual who doesn't need you to defend my rights to get married. Especially when you're a narcissist who refers herself in third person, like someone who would talk like an egotistical pro-wrestler because she believes that she somehow deserves more attention and adoration over others. That might looks cute with 2 years old, but you're just annoyingly egocentric.
Lala can spot a problem with your body.
#1: Mother nature does not create both homosexuality and heterosexuality equally. Lala would like proof of your claim because Lala does not see homosexuals everywhere.
#2: Lala thinks you're just being rude because you had a bad day. Please come back after you calm down and can talk sensibly.
|
|
|
LalaSatalin wrote:
DomFortress wrote:
Tell that to Mother Nature, which creates homosexuality and heterosexuality without bias. You self-righteous bigot. Who's determined to make children afraid of all the diverse human sexuality with your irrational homophobia, and possibly themselves if they just happened to be born as homosexuals.
And before you even try to get onto my case as some sorta petty revenge scheme, I'm a heterosexual who doesn't need you to defend my rights to get married. Especially when you're a narcissist who refers herself in third person, like someone who would talk like an egotistical pro-wrestler because she believes that she somehow deserves more attention and adoration over others. That might looks cute with 2 years old, but you're just annoyingly egocentric.
Lala can spot a problem with your body.
#1: Mother nature does not create both homosexuality and heterosexuality equally. Lala would like proof of your claim because Lala does not see homosexuals everywhere.
#2: Lala thinks you're just being rude because you had a bad day. Please come back after you calm down and can talk sensibly. Just because you don't bother to look, doesn't mean that homosexuality in nature(that's a hyperlink if you didn't notice by now) would go away. And if you still refuse empirical evidences observable by your own sense, you've no self-respect towards sensibility.
|
174 cr points
Send Message: 17 / F
Offline
|
DomFortress wrote:
Just because you don't bother to look, doesn't mean that homosexuality in nature(that's a hyperlink if you didn't notice by now) would go away. And if you still refuse empirical evidences observable by your own sense, you've no self-respect towards sensibility.
Lala appreciates that you stopped the name-calling. But Lala still is not convinced.
#1: That video did not prove that homosexuality is as common as heterosexuality.
#2: Comparing animal behavior to justify human behavior is not okay. If Lala saw a lion attacking a person, Lala would try to save the person.
#3: Lala would still like proof that homosexuality is made equally to heterosexuality by nature.
|
|
|
LalaSatalin wrote:
DomFortress wrote:
Just because you don't bother to look, doesn't mean that homosexuality in nature(that's a hyperlink if you didn't notice by now) would go away. And if you still refuse empirical evidences observable by your own sense, you've no self-respect towards sensibility.
Lala appreciates that you stopped the name-calling. But Lala still is not convinced.
#1: That video did not prove that homosexuality is as common as heterosexuality.
#2: Comparing animal behavior to justify human behavior is not okay. If Lala saw a lion attacking a person, Lala would try to save the person.
#3: Lala would still like proof that homosexuality is made equally to heterosexuality by nature. 1)It is when you stop unnecessarily oppressing and ignoring them, for no good reason other than your irrational homophobia.
2)Humans are just another species of social animals/ cultured apes, according to behaviour economy, anthropology, evolutionary biology, neurology, sociology, and from nature's perspective. No matter how egocentrically misguided you think you are with your unjustified superiority complex, you'll still get killed by lions(they hunt in a group) when you get between them and their next meal.
3)Quantity isn't quality. Just because there are more heterosexuals as homosexuals, doesn't give you the rights to ignore and oppress them.
|
32879 cr points
Send Message: F / New Americanadapan
Offline
|
LalaSatalin wrote:
#2: Comparing animal behavior to justify human behavior is not okay. If Lala saw a lion attacking a person, Lala would try to save the person.
I find it ironic that you counter the argument with an unrelated notion of a human benevolent action. Often the existence human benevolence is said to compensate for the degree to which we, despite being intelligent beings, resort to violence, hate and discrimination of those who are different. The irony here is that animals lack the ability to comprehend these concepts, yet homosexuality goes unnoticed and without concern from the point of view of those animals.
So apparently despite being gifted with our huge, complex brains we still are inferior to the rest of the animal kingdom when it comes to tolerance and acceptance of those around us.
|
174 cr points
Send Message: 17 / F
Offline
|
DomFortress wrote:
1)It is when you stop unnecessarily oppressing them, for no good reason other than your irrational homophobia.
2)Humans are just another species of social animals/ cultured apes, according to behaviour economy, anthropology, evolutionary biology, neurology, sociology, and from nature's perspective. No matter how egocentrically misguided you think you are with your unjustified superiority complex.
3)Quantity isn't quality. Just because there are more heterosexuals as homosexuals, doesn't give you the rights to ignore and oppress them.
Lala is not homophobic. Lala only thinks that homosexuality should not be encouraged.
#1: Lala disagrees. There is no reason for Lala to believe something that has insufficient evidence, just like how there is insufficient evidence for God.
#2: Humans are capable of much more than other animals. To compare humans to animals is ridiculous, otherwise survival itself would be hypocritical. Not everyone is a vegetarian.
#3: Lala never said to ignore homosexuals. Lala only said to stop encouraging homosexuality to society. Lala thinks the best conclusion would be to find a fixture to the causes, just like how lazy-eye problems are fixed during childhood. Just because the child was born with it, does not mean it should be kept.
|
174 cr points
Send Message: 17 / F
Offline
|
JustineKo2 wrote:
I find it ironic that you counter the argument with an unrelated notion of a human benevolent action. Often the existence human benevolence is said to compensate for the degree to which we, despite being intelligent beings, resort to violence, hate and discrimination of those who are different. The irony here is that animals lack the ability to comprehend these concepts, yet homosexuality goes unnoticed and without concern from the point of view of those animals.
So apparently despite being gifted with our huge, complex brains we still are inferior to the rest of the animal kingdom when it comes to tolerance and acceptance of those around us.
Lala thinks you just proved Lala's point. Animals lack the ability to comprehend these concepts, and shouldn't be compared to humans when it comes to behavior. Just because it is a natural desire, does not mean it is okay. Otherwise you are condoning pedophilia, where pedophiles use little children to fulfill their sexual desires.
|
|
|
LalaSatalin wrote:
DomFortress wrote:
1)It is when you stop unnecessarily oppressing them, for no good reason other than your irrational homophobia.
2)Humans are just another species of social animals/ cultured apes, according to behaviour economy, anthropology, evolutionary biology, neurology, sociology, and from nature's perspective. No matter how egocentrically misguided you think you are with your unjustified superiority complex.
3)Quantity isn't quality. Just because there are more heterosexuals as homosexuals, doesn't give you the rights to ignore and oppress them.
Lala is not homophobic. Lala only thinks that homosexuality should not be encouraged.
#1: Lala disagrees. There is no reason for Lala to believe something that has insufficient evidence, just like how there is insufficient evidence for God.
#2: Humans are capable of much more than other animals. To compare humans to animals is ridiculous, otherwise survival itself would be hypocritical. Not everyone is a vegetarian.
#3: Lala never said to ignore homosexuals. Lala only said to stop encouraging homosexuality to society. Lala thinks the best conclusion would be to find a fixture to the causes, just like how lazy-eye problems are fixed during childhood. Just because the child was born with it, does not mean it should be kept. Do you fear lazy-eye just as you would fear homosexuals? Hence you would try to correct an error.
And there's irrefutable evidence when it comes to the existence of homosexuality; you and I are arguing about it. Whereas the monotheistic Christian God is historically proven to be man-made.
Finally, you're right that you've proven just how much more ignorant, weak, and superstitious you can be as human. You can't even hunt for your own meal, much less yourself saving others.
|
174 cr points
Send Message: 17 / F
Offline
|
DomFortress wrote:
Do you fear lazy-eye just as you would fear homosexuals? Hence you would try to correct an error.
And there's irrefutable evidence when it comes to the existence of homosexuality; you and I are arguing about it. Whereas the monotheistic Christian God is historically proven to be man-made.
Finally, you're right that you've proven just how much more ignorant, weak, and superstitious you can be as human. You can't even hunt for your own meal, much less yourself saving others.
Lala believes you're twisting and ignoring a lot of Lala's points. But Lala doesn't mind.
#1: Lala would like to know your basis on saying that the act of correcting lazy-eye is due to phobia.
#2: Lala never said there's no evidence for homosexuality. Lala was asking for evidence of homosexuality being as common as heterosexuality. Lala believes you couldn't provide evidence, so it's fair for Lala to not believe what you're saying.
|
|
|
LalaSatalin wrote:
JustineKo2 wrote:
I find it ironic that you counter the argument with an unrelated notion of a human benevolent action. Often the existence human benevolence is said to compensate for the degree to which we, despite being intelligent beings, resort to violence, hate and discrimination of those who are different. The irony here is that animals lack the ability to comprehend these concepts, yet homosexuality goes unnoticed and without concern from the point of view of those animals.
So apparently despite being gifted with our huge, complex brains we still are inferior to the rest of the animal kingdom when it comes to tolerance and acceptance of those around us.
Lala thinks you just proved Lala's point. Animals lack the ability to comprehend these concepts, and shouldn't be compared to humans when it comes to behavior. Just because it is a natural desire, does not mean it is okay. Otherwise you are condoning pedophilia, where pedophiles use little children to fulfill their sexual desires. Then you're behaving worst than other humans with better reasoning skills, when your committed a red herring fallacy by yourself overarching homosexuality as something to be feared as paedophilia, without sufficient justification. While according to DSM IV here, homosexuality is no longer a mental disorder, whereas paedophilia OTOH still is.
|
32879 cr points
Send Message: F / New Americanadapan
Offline
|
LalaSatalin wrote:
JustineKo2 wrote:
I find it ironic that you counter the argument with an unrelated notion of a human benevolent action. Often the existence human benevolence is said to compensate for the degree to which we, despite being intelligent beings, resort to violence, hate and discrimination of those who are different. The irony here is that animals lack the ability to comprehend these concepts, yet homosexuality goes unnoticed and without concern from the point of view of those animals.
So apparently despite being gifted with our huge, complex brains we still are inferior to the rest of the animal kingdom when it comes to tolerance and acceptance of those around us.
Lala thinks you just proved Lala's point. Animals lack the ability to comprehend these concepts, and shouldn't be compared to humans when it comes to behavior. Just because it is a natural desire, does not mean it is okay. Otherwise you are condoning pedophilia, where pedophiles use little children to fulfill their sexual desires. If I proved your point then you would agree with the closing sentence that is really the crux of my argument. Which is that creatures such as lions, apes, deer, dogs whatever have a virtue that humans lack, so perhaps it is US who are inferior. You are obviously offended by comparing humans to animals, yet seem to not realize my comparison deprecates animals down to human level not the other way around.
|
174 cr points
Send Message: 17 / F
Offline
|
DomFortress wrote:
Then you're behaving worst than other humans with better reasoning skills, when your committed a red herring fallacy by yourself overarching homosexuality as something to be feared as paedophilia, without sufficient justification. While according to DSM IV here, homosexuality is no longer a mental disorder, whereas paedophilia OTOH still is.
The reason homosexuality is no longer considered a paraphilia is because they threatened the psychiatry organisations with violent tactics. Originally it was lined up along with pedophilia. Lala will not be deceived by your tactics.
|
174 cr points
Send Message: 17 / F
Offline
|
JustineKo2 wrote:
If I proved your point then you would agree with the closing sentence that is really the crux of my argument. Which is that creatures such as lions, apes, deer, dogs whatever have a virtue that humans lack, so perhaps it is US who are inferior. You are obviously offended by comparing humans to animals, yet seem to not realize my comparison deprecates animals down to human level not the other way around.
Lala thinks you're lying to yourself. If society were to condone human behavior based on other animals' behavior, then society is opening gates for many other unacceptable actions. Lala has seen a dog eat its own poop, an Lala has also witnessed a cat attacking a person.
|
Post Reply
Gay Marriage 
