Please… You are just soooo eager to support a man’s sticking his penis into another man’s anus, you are completely unable to think rationally. Were you reasonable, you never would have posted this trash as a refutation of anything. The article actually supports my position and not yours – and it does it perfectly.
I did not say homosexuality did not exist at all amongst animals. I said
“The fact is, homosexuality is not widespread at all. If anything, BISEXUALITY exists in the animal kingdom
Message 19773029
Your article simply confuses homosexuality for bisexuality. It gleefully presents occurrences of homosexuality in the unnatural circumstances of captivity as “evidence” for homosexuality in nature, completely ignoring how prevalent homosexuality is amongst humans who are also held in captivity. This is not science. It is stupidity masquerading as science (very common amongst leftist “scientists” these days). Real science would not at all allow itself to be used to support Sodomite politics. If anything here, it would note the increases of homosexual behavior in captivity amongst humans and animals (despite whether the animals had access to the opposite sex) and begin to posit an association between these two conditions. (Fancy that! Logic! Such a novel idea!)
Even the infamous Bonobos (of which the Bohomos are so fond) turn out to be bisexual and not homosexual. And the allegedly “homosexual” dolphins mentioned in the article turn out not to be homosexual either. They are, by the article’s own inadvertent admission bisexual, sharing a female between them (a thing you obviously must also support for humans, since it occurs amongst animals right along with your most precious homosexuality). Sometimes a male will even help another male take a female from other males (which you must also support, since you obviously take your moral instruction from animals).
The relative few truly chronic homosexual animals in nature are simply not that impressive. Even the few chronic cases of captive “homosexual” animals (like your little Sodomite penguins - hah!) is just not impressive - which is why I said
, and [animal homosexuality’s] frequency is not so prevalent that we ought to think it is acceptable to us.
Message 19773029
But the article also perfectly supports my most important point about homosexuality in animals. Even were it true that you had these Sodomite animals in droves, just hanging in the trees waiting to take it up the rear, we still ought not claim their behavior is acceptable to us. Read it for yourself, since you obviously haven’t read it (or are just so drunk by your fetishes you can’t remember it):
Still, scientists warn about drawing conclusions about humans. "For some people, what animals do is a yardstick of what is and isn't natural," Mr. Vasey said. "They make a leap from saying if it's natural, it's morally and ethically desirable."
But he added: "Infanticide is widespread in the animal kingdom. To jump from that to say it is desirable makes no sense. We shouldn't be using animals to craft moral and social policies for the kinds of human societies we want to live in. Animals don't take care of the elderly. I don't particularly think that should be a platform for closing down nursing homes."
This is why I said in my post:
…theft, polygamy, "swinging", and a host of other behaviors are very widespread in the animal kingdom. This is just no reason for us to claim humans can legitimately engage in these behaviors. Unlike brute beasts, we can know what we are in nature and live accordingly. (duh....)
Message 19773029
So my position yet stands in the fullest force, and is even made more obvious by your post.
You leftists are telling the world that “if it is good enough for brute beasts, it is good enough for human society.” This is a complete perversion of reason. Of course we ought not be a bit surprised because leftists are very eager to pervert good things like reason, sex, marriage, family and the truth. They are pathetically predictable. |
