OBAMA: GAY MARRIAGE IS COOL WITH ME

Obama is extremely gay, once he's done with politics he'll announce his true love, Will Smith.

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:51 PM, vasio said:

Obama is extremely gay, once he's done with politics he'll announce his true love, Will Smith.

not will smith, but d' angelo

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:53 PM, ruiagnelo said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:51 PM, vasio said:

Obama is extremely gay, once he's done with politics he'll announce his true love, Will Smith.

 

not will smith, but d' angelo

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I thought D'Angelo was dating R Kelly.

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:54 PM, vasio said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:53 PM, ruiagnelo said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:51 PM, vasio said:

Obama is extremely gay, once he's done with politics he'll announce his true love, Will Smith.

 

not will smith, but d' angelo

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

I thought D'Angelo was dating R Kelly.

yes, but R Kelly cheated him with

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:38 PM, Kanakori said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:36 PM, patternoverlap said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:24 PM, Kanakori said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:19 PM, patternoverlap said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 1:24 PM, Kanakori said:

I don't like to play God, I don't think we know weverything about these natural processes to change them so radically. Even if you don't believe in some kind of superior organization, you are ignoring millions of years of evolution.

 

Again, what does natural or unnatural mean?

 

FYI

 

The natural order is the sole evident reality we can still relly on. It attains perfect balances that should be perpetuated. Even though humanity is part of that and self regulates itself to this day, any system it creates will never be as perfect. Perfection is in nature.

 

Homosexuality has existed for thousands of years within humanity and exists in the animal kingdom and therefore in nature.

 

Again?

You seem to be ignoring my argument so I'm just restating it in different configurations. You used the term "natural processes" as if homosexuality was something outside of that, that humans are imposing on society. My argument is that homosexuality has existed for thousands of years (that we know of, could be tens of thousands, but I won't get into that because I don't know of any solid evidence to support it) in human societies and exists in the animal kingdom, independent of human society. It's not as if all of these animals got the ideas from gay porn or something. It happens/happened to fit some need. Since you probably didn't read the link I put there, I'll quote the very first sentence: "Homosexual behavior in animals refers to the documented evidence of homosexual and bisexual behavior in various (non-human) species. Such behaviors include sex,courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same sex animals." So if several species of animals have been documented doing it, how is it some unnatural deviation?

has anybody mentioned yet that the "traditional" family is a relatively new thing? so one could say it is unnatural.

nvm

Ugh, this thread...

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:56 PM, patternoverlap said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:38 PM, Kanakori said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:36 PM, patternoverlap said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:24 PM, Kanakori said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:19 PM, patternoverlap said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 1:24 PM, Kanakori said:

I don't like to play God, I don't think we know weverything about these natural processes to change them so radically. Even if you don't believe in some kind of superior organization, you are ignoring millions of years of evolution.

 

Again, what does natural or unnatural mean?

 

FYI

 

The natural order is the sole evident reality we can still relly on. It attains perfect balances that should be perpetuated. Even though humanity is part of that and self regulates itself to this day, any system it creates will never be as perfect. Perfection is in nature.

 

Homosexuality has existed for thousands of years within humanity and exists in the animal kingdom and therefore in nature.

 

Again?

 

You seem to be ignoring my argument so I'm just restating it in different configurations. You used the term "natural processes" as if homosexuality was something outside of that, that humans are imposing on society. My argument is that homosexuality has existed for thousands of years (that we know of, could be tens of thousands, but I won't get into that because I don't know of any solid evidence to support it) in human societies and exists in the animal kingdom, independent of human society. It's not as if all of these animals got the ideas from gay porn or something. It happens/happened to fit some need. Since you probably didn't read the link I put there, I'll quote the very first sentence: "Homosexual behavior in animals refers to the documented evidence of homosexual and bisexual behavior in various (non-human) species. Such behaviors include sex,courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same sex animals." So if several species of animals have been documented doing it, how is it some unnatural deviation?

So what?The nature of human beings is not necessarily the same as the nature of other species, and it is not at all clear when an observed behavior can be counted as sexual or as implying a sexual orientation.

There is documented proof of cannibalism and rape in the animal kingdom, but that doesn’t make it right for humans. Plus you're talking about rare ocurrences and studies propagated and promoted by gay lobbys. Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals, for reasons of survival, the reproductive instinct among animals is always directed to an individual of the opposite sex. Therefore, an animal can never be homosexual as such. However, the interaction of other instincts (particularlly dominance) can result in behavior that appears to be homosexual. That behavior cannot be equated with an animal homosexuality. All it means is that animal sexual behavior involves aspects beyond that of reproduction.

  On 5/11/2012 at 4:32 PM, Kanakori said:

Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals

oh properly speaking? you should have said before.

  On 5/11/2012 at 4:32 PM, Kanakori said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:56 PM, patternoverlap said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:38 PM, Kanakori said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:36 PM, patternoverlap said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:24 PM, Kanakori said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:19 PM, patternoverlap said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 1:24 PM, Kanakori said:

I don't like to play God, I don't think we know weverything about these natural processes to change them so radically. Even if you don't believe in some kind of superior organization, you are ignoring millions of years of evolution.

 

Again, what does natural or unnatural mean?

 

FYI

 

The natural order is the sole evident reality we can still relly on. It attains perfect balances that should be perpetuated. Even though humanity is part of that and self regulates itself to this day, any system it creates will never be as perfect. Perfection is in nature.

 

Homosexuality has existed for thousands of years within humanity and exists in the animal kingdom and therefore in nature.

 

Again?

 

You seem to be ignoring my argument so I'm just restating it in different configurations. You used the term "natural processes" as if homosexuality was something outside of that, that humans are imposing on society. My argument is that homosexuality has existed for thousands of years (that we know of, could be tens of thousands, but I won't get into that because I don't know of any solid evidence to support it) in human societies and exists in the animal kingdom, independent of human society. It's not as if all of these animals got the ideas from gay porn or something. It happens/happened to fit some need. Since you probably didn't read the link I put there, I'll quote the very first sentence: "Homosexual behavior in animals refers to the documented evidence of homosexual and bisexual behavior in various (non-human) species. Such behaviors include sex,courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same sex animals." So if several species of animals have been documented doing it, how is it some unnatural deviation?

 

 

So what?The nature of human beings is not necessarily the same as the nature of other species, and it is not at all clear when an observed behavior can be counted as sexual or as implying a sexual orientation.

There is documented proof of cannibalism and rape in the animal kingdom, but that doesn’t make it right for humans. Plus you're talking about rare ocurrences and studies propagated and promoted by gay lobbys. Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals, for reasons of survival, the reproductive instinct among animals is always directed to an individual of the opposite sex. Therefore, an animal can never be homosexual as such. However, the interaction of other instincts (particularlly dominance) can result in behavior that appears to be homosexual. That behavior cannot be equated with an animal homosexuality. All it means is that animal sexual behavior involves aspects beyond that of reproduction.

Ah yes, the old "man is separate from nature" argument; typically perpetuated by religion.

As you seem to be an expert on animal behavior, what is the distinction between homosexuality and homosexual behavior among animal species? A certain number of times they engage in homosexual relations? Do they need to be interior decorators wearing pink scarves?

Rare occurrences? 1500 species have been observed practicing homosexual acts as well as maintaining homosexual relationships

You're seriously comparing homoseuality between humans with homoseuality in animals?

  Quote

Plus you're talking about rare ocurrences and studies propagated and promoted by gay lobbys.

  On 5/11/2012 at 4:53 PM, Kanakori said:

You're seriously comparing homoseuality between humans with homoseuality in animals?

 

  Quote

Plus you're talking about rare ocurrences and studies propagated and promoted by gay lobbys.

Why wouldn't I? We are animals. Unless you have some concrete evidence to support that we aren't.

Show me some real evidence that these studies are linked to some sinister gay lobby.

- We are much more complex in our growth than an animal. A dog isn't influenced by his parents. It's pure instinct.

-"Sinister"? You're implying there isn't one?

Also I don't need to look for evidence, it's right there, on the article. Instead of just observing the phenomenom, they immediately relate it to Human homosexuality.

.

  On 5/11/2012 at 3:35 PM, compson said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:09 PM, Kanakori said:

- We are much more complex in our growth than an animal. A dog isn't influenced by his parents. It's pure instinct.

-"Sinister"? You're implying there isn't one?

First of all, lol at the first bullet point. We might construct more complex environments for ourselves than other animals but those other animals absolutely learn from their parents.

Again, show me evidence of a gay lobby group influencing a scientific study on homosexuality in animals.

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:09 PM, Kanakori said:

Also I don't need to look for evidence, it's right there, on the article. Instead of just observing the phenomenom, they immediately relate it to Human homosexuality.

How are the two different? Again, you are referencing this human exceptionalism that puts humanity outside of nature somehow.

No they aren't. A dog doesn't have a social oganization. He doesn't adopt those kind of behaviors. His sexual appetites are purely instinct driven.

this thread is a lol

but can we ban Kanakori now please? he is most unnatural.

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:23 PM, Kanakori said:

No they aren't. A dog doesn't have a social oganization. He doesn't adopt those kind of behaviors. His sexual appetites are purely instinct driven.

Haha man you're dense, just had to come out of my self-imposed WATMM exile to say that. lololololloloololololololololololol

You know, I could argue a dog would fuck a cat and do an analogy with humans and say we could fuck monkeys and horses all we like. And that would probably be ok in your book.

The thruth is, I don't know nothing about anything, I only relly on what I can still observe as an objective truth. You and some others however are hilarious. You actually think you hold some kind of knowledge. I'm just as right as you could ever be. We could extend this conversation to such a relativeness that heterosexual matching would become meaningless or irrational and homesexuality the norm. That's because every reference in this world has been or is being destructed. We are reaching the final stages of the decay of civilization, there will be no union, no culture, merely independet people. Completely detached from each other, united by tastes and social circles but without background or context. A society of automation and efficiency where we are all isolated from our co-workers and every procedure is applied without hesitation in the name of functionalism.

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:29 PM, Iain C said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:23 PM, Kanakori said:

No they aren't. A dog doesn't have a social oganization. He doesn't adopt those kind of behaviors. His sexual appetites are purely instinct driven.

 

Haha man you're dense, just had to come out of my self-imposed WATMM exile to say that. lololololloloololololololololololol

I think it is a good time to ask kanakori his age.

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:32 PM, Kanakori said:

I have lost the argument.

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:33 PM, Iain C said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:32 PM, Kanakori said:

I have lost the argument.

Feeling the need to chime in here. I'm a gay Irish man living in NYC with my partner of seven years (we met playing rugby with The Gotham Knights, a gay inclusive team out of Manhattan).

In response to whoever is slamming the idea of gay adoption: I am lucky enough to know a few gay couples who have either adopted children or are fostering children. What they are doing is offering their children is a safe, loving and supportive environment, something new to many foster kids. These kids are in great hands and already growing up into cool, shape and kind little individuals. The idea that I would make a bad parent because of my homosexuality - though still quite a common point of argument - is absurd and offensive and more importantly just an ignorant out dated concept that stems from the misconception that gay people = pedophiles. Fuck off.

I was surprised at how moved I've been over the past few days. Watching North Carolina vote against their basic human rights (both for gays and straights) in a Jim Jones mass hysteria fashion was heart breaking and bewildering, and when President Obama stepped forward and said what he said, well I cried for the first time in a long time. People move on, we need more love in the world, truly. It's hard enough to put your best foot forward everyday and keep your heart open without this prejudiced bullshit. There is nothing that boils my blood more than when somebody tries to tell me Gay is a choice, I have come to the understanding that most people who truly believe this are deeply closeted, and are confusing their choice to stay in the closet with the real heart of the matter, that I am gay, I was born gay and it's actually fucking great.

I posted on here a lot more a year or so ago but noticed the smug manner in which words like fag/queer/geigh was thrown around, maybe not homophobia per say but when kid's are still killing themselves and parents still trying to counsel, pray or beat the gay out of their children, and when kids are still killing themselves, I don't find any of it fun.

As an interesting aside Christianity actually celebrated same sex marriage in the past. No that it matters as they're a bunch of sick weakeners, but it's something that nobody ever mentions:

http://anthropologist.livejournal.com/1314574.html