Renhet So I can call you a white, ignorant bigot and not be disrecpectful?
That is an opinion though.
Fat shaming
posted in
Off Topic
[quote=Renhet] So I can call you a white, ignorant bigot and not be disrecpectful?[/quote]
That is an opinion though.
That is an opinion though.
smakers
Pronouns don't come from sex, though.
Everyone I come in contact with calls me a woman so why cant you? It's obvious that I'm a woman when they look at me, or talk to me. It's irrelevant what chromosomes I was born with because it has no impact on how people view me.
You can call me a male all you want, but all you're doing is being an asshole. It's like bringing up that a someone is a rape victim for no reason when it has no impact on how you should view them.
[quote=smakers][/quote]
Pronouns don't come from sex, though.
Everyone I come in contact with calls me a woman so why cant you? It's obvious that I'm a woman when they look at me, or talk to me. It's irrelevant what chromosomes I was born with because it has no impact on how people view me.
You can call me a male all you want, but all you're doing is being an asshole. It's like bringing up that a someone is a rape victim for no reason when it has no impact on how you should view them.
Pronouns don't come from sex, though.
Everyone I come in contact with calls me a woman so why cant you? It's obvious that I'm a woman when they look at me, or talk to me. It's irrelevant what chromosomes I was born with because it has no impact on how people view me.
You can call me a male all you want, but all you're doing is being an asshole. It's like bringing up that a someone is a rape victim for no reason when it has no impact on how you should view them.
I am a genderqueer bisexual twink of mixed race. I dream of being a svelte pretty boy (er, man) that has an androgynous face and a cute girly butt! I would start out with a delicate chin or dainty nose to start, then move on to minimal brow ridges and a soft jawline, or just keep the nose and jaw how they are. I would really love to be an androgynous, girly-faced guy like model Jesus Benitez Valdivieso. I love silver accessories, rubies, and the color violet! ? I am a Deist/agnostic theist intrigued by Taoism. (Please don't shove your religious views down my throat.) I am a sex-positive member of the LGBT community who values openness, curiosity, logic, effort, and reliability. Pansexual fits me more than bisexual as I am attracted to people of all kinds, regardless of sex or gender, but I still refer to myself as bisexual for convenience. I am somewhat femme and submissive but I have a masculine, dominant side, too. You could say I'm androgynous.
I am a genderqueer bisexual twink of mixed race. I dream of being a svelte pretty boy (er, man) that has an androgynous face and a cute girly butt! I would start out with a delicate chin or dainty nose to start, then move on to minimal brow ridges and a soft jawline, or just keep the nose and jaw how they are. I would really love to be an androgynous, girly-faced guy like model Jesus Benitez Valdivieso. I love silver accessories, rubies, and the color violet! ? I am a Deist/agnostic theist intrigued by Taoism. (Please don't shove your religious views down my throat.) I am a sex-positive member of the LGBT community who values openness, curiosity, logic, effort, and reliability. Pansexual fits me more than bisexual as I am attracted to people of all kinds, regardless of sex or gender, but I still refer to myself as bisexual for convenience. I am somewhat femme and submissive but I have a masculine, dominant side, too. You could say I'm androgynous.
The passive aggressiveness in this thread has reached its threshold.
The passive aggressiveness in this thread has reached its threshold.
A few more things to Smaka
1) I feel like you are only using the biological argument of sex, being biological a male or female, to completely hold your argument and it just doesn't work. As I said in my last post to you, the only other reason you seem to be against the rest of the LGBT community is producing offspring. Which I attempted to refute, so I really am wondering what do you have against the rest of the community? Your argument regarding born sex is correct, I will never disagree with that. Honestly, no one should say they aren't male or female, but gender is completely different.
2) The reason that a few people are having problems with what you are saying is that you're not explaining why you are completely against LGBT community since you don't like that they cannot produce offspring. But who really cares? Do we, as humans, really need to keep producing offspring when the Earth can barely sustain the population that it has now? Are you against birth control, since it will stop the ability to reproduce?
A few more things to Smaka
1) I feel like you are only using the biological argument of sex, being biological a male or female, to completely hold your argument and it just doesn't work. As I said in my last post to you, the only other reason you seem to be against the rest of the LGBT community is producing offspring. Which I attempted to refute, so I really am wondering what do you have against the rest of the community? Your argument regarding born sex is correct, I will never disagree with that. Honestly, no one should say they aren't male or female, but gender is completely different.
2) The reason that a few people are having problems with what you are saying is that you're not explaining why you are completely against LGBT community since you don't like that they cannot produce offspring. But who really cares? Do we, as humans, really need to keep producing offspring when the Earth can barely sustain the population that it has now? Are you against birth control, since it will stop the ability to reproduce?
1) I feel like you are only using the biological argument of sex, being biological a male or female, to completely hold your argument and it just doesn't work. As I said in my last post to you, the only other reason you seem to be against the rest of the LGBT community is producing offspring. Which I attempted to refute, so I really am wondering what do you have against the rest of the community? Your argument regarding born sex is correct, I will never disagree with that. Honestly, no one should say they aren't male or female, but gender is completely different.
2) The reason that a few people are having problems with what you are saying is that you're not explaining why you are completely against LGBT community since you don't like that they cannot produce offspring. But who really cares? Do we, as humans, really need to keep producing offspring when the Earth can barely sustain the population that it has now? Are you against birth control, since it will stop the ability to reproduce?
smaka i honestly think you're just trying to be offensive now
waffle identifies herself as a girl and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. other people can consider her a female and most likely do not have a problem with her decision, regardless of their opinions and beliefs. if that's what she desires, can't you respect her enough to not call her a male? it's not even a matter of beliefs anymore, it's simply just ignorant.
you're basically saying that people cannot be happy if they don't live their lives biologically correct.
i can respect that you have your own beliefs and opinions, but so does she, and so does everyone else. it's like you are considering your opinion to be a fact and that your argument proves valid more than anyone else's opinion here.
smaka i honestly think you're just trying to be offensive now
waffle identifies herself as a girl and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. other people can consider her a female and most likely do not have a problem with her decision, regardless of their opinions and beliefs. if that's what she desires, can't you respect her enough to not call her a male? it's not even a matter of beliefs anymore, it's simply just ignorant.
you're basically saying that people cannot be happy if they don't live their lives biologically correct.
i can respect that you have your own beliefs and opinions, but so does she, and so does everyone else. it's like you are considering your opinion to be a fact and that your argument proves valid more than anyone else's opinion here.
waffle identifies herself as a girl and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. other people can consider her a female and most likely do not have a problem with her decision, regardless of their opinions and beliefs. if that's what she desires, can't you respect her enough to not call her a male? it's not even a matter of beliefs anymore, it's simply just ignorant.
you're basically saying that people cannot be happy if they don't live their lives biologically correct.
i can respect that you have your own beliefs and opinions, but so does she, and so does everyone else. it's like you are considering your opinion to be a fact and that your argument proves valid more than anyone else's opinion here.
LGBT issues are like foot fetishes.
Do they effect me in any way? No.
Do I have any real reason to dislike it? No.
Is it creepy and weird and gross? Yes.
LGBT issues are like foot fetishes.
Do they effect me in any way? No.
Do I have any real reason to dislike it? No.
Is it creepy and weird and gross? Yes.
Do they effect me in any way? No.
Do I have any real reason to dislike it? No.
Is it creepy and weird and gross? Yes.
remedyi assure you smaka isnt trolling
how do you know
[quote=remedy]i assure you smaka isnt trolling[/quote]
how do you know
how do you know
http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/tumblr_ljh0puClWT1qfkt17.gif
me reading this thread
[img]http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/tumblr_ljh0puClWT1qfkt17.gif[/img]
me reading this thread
me reading this thread
smakersYes, I do think there is something inherently wrong with being so far out of your own mind that you want to deceive yourself and the world into thinking you're the opposite gender.
It's just a shame people still think like this, is all #closeminded
[quote=smakers]
Yes, I do think there is something inherently wrong with being so far out of your own mind that you want to deceive yourself and the world into thinking you're the opposite gender.[/quote]
It's just a shame people still think like this, is all #closeminded
Yes, I do think there is something inherently wrong with being so far out of your own mind that you want to deceive yourself and the world into thinking you're the opposite gender.[/quote]
It's just a shame people still think like this, is all #closeminded
Renhet So I can call you a white, ignorant bigot and not be disrecpectful?
You are more than welcome to call me whatever you'd like, but no, personal insults because you disagree with me don't qualify as "not disrespectful".
wafflebPronouns don't come from sex, though.
Everyone I come in contact with calls me a woman so why cant you? It's obvious that I'm a woman when they look at me, or talk to me. It's irrelevant what chromosomes I was born with because it has no impact on how people view me.
You can call me a male all you want, but all you're doing is being an asshole. It's like bringing up that a someone is a rape victim for no reason when it has no impact on how you should view them.
If you want to consider me an asshole for sticking to my beliefs and scientific facts (that a person with XY chromosomes is male and a person with XX is female) then you are more than welcome to call me an asshole. Chromosomes are not irrelevant. Some people probably view you as female because you act female. Others view you as female because you have changed your appearance to look female. You are still a biological male and that will not change. What I am presenting is not me being an asshole or rude toward you; it is merely fact. You don't have to like it, and you are welcome to disagree with me all you want. While you are calling me an asshole, I will call you male. Comparing your chromosomal makeup to a rape victim is grasping at straws, at best.
Fzero
1. I am not holding an argument; I am expressing scientific facts coupled with my beliefs. I have nothing against the LGBT community; I simply do not condone their sexuality. I understand and accept that it is their natural-born sexuality which largely does not affect my life in any way, and I do not think less of them as people for it. A transgendered person is more than welcome to take on whichever societal gender role they please, and you are all welcome to call them by whichever pronoun you wish. I will call them by their scientific sex. You and your wife don't want kids, and that's fine. You are still in a biologically 'correct' relationship (1 man + 1 woman).
2. Their lifestyle inherently cannot produce offspring. I don't think we necessarily need to produce tons of offspring. I agree, the world is already overpopulated. I am merely speaking facts and my own principles when I refer to that lifestyle being biologically incorrect or unsustainable. I am not against birth control.
jermang
I am not trying to be offensive; I am stating my opinions that are derived from my personal belief system and scientific facts. Waffle is more than welcome to identify himself as a girl. He and the rest of the world have the right to think that's perfectly fine. If you think it's ignorant, I'm sorry. 'Ignorant' couldn't be further from the truth. You are asking me to disregard my own beliefs entirely and call a diamond a spade because the diamond wants to be a spade. If you want to refer to him as her, go for it. I prefer not to delude the truth; nothing more. My 'argument' doesn't prove more valid than anyone else's, because it's not an argument. It is me presenting my opinion and why I have that opinion.
eliIt's just a shame people still think like this, is all #closeminded
I am no more closed-minded to the opinions and beliefs of others than they are to the opinions and beliefs that I am presenting in this thread. On the contrary, I am very open-minded. I don't have to like it to accept it, do I?
[quote=Renhet] So I can call you a white, ignorant bigot and not be disrecpectful?[/quote]
You are more than welcome to call me whatever you'd like, but no, personal insults because you disagree with me don't qualify as "not disrespectful".
[quote=waffleb]
Pronouns don't come from sex, though.
Everyone I come in contact with calls me a woman so why cant you? It's obvious that I'm a woman when they look at me, or talk to me. It's irrelevant what chromosomes I was born with because it has no impact on how people view me.
You can call me a male all you want, but all you're doing is being an asshole. It's like bringing up that a someone is a rape victim for no reason when it has no impact on how you should view them.[/quote]
If you want to consider me an asshole for sticking to my beliefs and scientific facts (that a person with XY chromosomes is male and a person with XX is female) then you are more than welcome to call me an asshole. Chromosomes are not irrelevant. Some people probably view you as female because you act female. Others view you as female because you have changed your appearance to look female. You are still a biological male and that will not change. What I am presenting is not me being an asshole or rude toward you; it is merely fact. You don't have to like it, and you are welcome to disagree with me all you want. While you are calling me an asshole, I will call you male. Comparing your chromosomal makeup to a rape victim is grasping at straws, at best.
[quote=Fzero][/quote]
1. I am not holding an argument; I am expressing scientific facts coupled with my beliefs. I have nothing against the LGBT community; I simply do not condone their sexuality. I understand and accept that it is their natural-born sexuality which largely does not affect my life in any way, and I do not think less of them as people for it. A transgendered person is more than welcome to take on whichever societal gender role they please, and you are all welcome to call them by whichever pronoun you wish. I will call them by their scientific sex. You and your wife don't want kids, and that's fine. You are still in a biologically 'correct' relationship (1 man + 1 woman).
2. Their lifestyle inherently cannot produce offspring. I don't think we necessarily need to produce tons of offspring. I agree, the world is already overpopulated. I am merely speaking facts and my own principles when I refer to that lifestyle being biologically incorrect or unsustainable. I am not against birth control.
[quote=jermang][/quote]
I am not trying to be offensive; I am stating my opinions that are derived from my personal belief system and scientific facts. Waffle is more than welcome to identify himself as a girl. He and the rest of the world have the right to think that's perfectly fine. If you think it's ignorant, I'm sorry. 'Ignorant' couldn't be further from the truth. You are asking me to disregard my own beliefs entirely and call a diamond a spade because the diamond wants to be a spade. If you want to refer to him as her, go for it. I prefer not to delude the truth; nothing more. My 'argument' doesn't prove more valid than anyone else's, because it's not an argument. It is me presenting my opinion and why I have that opinion.
[quote=eli]
It's just a shame people still think like this, is all #closeminded[/quote]
I am no more closed-minded to the opinions and beliefs of others than they are to the opinions and beliefs that I am presenting in this thread. On the contrary, I am very open-minded. I don't have to like it to accept it, do I?
You are more than welcome to call me whatever you'd like, but no, personal insults because you disagree with me don't qualify as "not disrespectful".
[quote=waffleb]
Pronouns don't come from sex, though.
Everyone I come in contact with calls me a woman so why cant you? It's obvious that I'm a woman when they look at me, or talk to me. It's irrelevant what chromosomes I was born with because it has no impact on how people view me.
You can call me a male all you want, but all you're doing is being an asshole. It's like bringing up that a someone is a rape victim for no reason when it has no impact on how you should view them.[/quote]
If you want to consider me an asshole for sticking to my beliefs and scientific facts (that a person with XY chromosomes is male and a person with XX is female) then you are more than welcome to call me an asshole. Chromosomes are not irrelevant. Some people probably view you as female because you act female. Others view you as female because you have changed your appearance to look female. You are still a biological male and that will not change. What I am presenting is not me being an asshole or rude toward you; it is merely fact. You don't have to like it, and you are welcome to disagree with me all you want. While you are calling me an asshole, I will call you male. Comparing your chromosomal makeup to a rape victim is grasping at straws, at best.
[quote=Fzero][/quote]
1. I am not holding an argument; I am expressing scientific facts coupled with my beliefs. I have nothing against the LGBT community; I simply do not condone their sexuality. I understand and accept that it is their natural-born sexuality which largely does not affect my life in any way, and I do not think less of them as people for it. A transgendered person is more than welcome to take on whichever societal gender role they please, and you are all welcome to call them by whichever pronoun you wish. I will call them by their scientific sex. You and your wife don't want kids, and that's fine. You are still in a biologically 'correct' relationship (1 man + 1 woman).
2. Their lifestyle inherently cannot produce offspring. I don't think we necessarily need to produce tons of offspring. I agree, the world is already overpopulated. I am merely speaking facts and my own principles when I refer to that lifestyle being biologically incorrect or unsustainable. I am not against birth control.
[quote=jermang][/quote]
I am not trying to be offensive; I am stating my opinions that are derived from my personal belief system and scientific facts. Waffle is more than welcome to identify himself as a girl. He and the rest of the world have the right to think that's perfectly fine. If you think it's ignorant, I'm sorry. 'Ignorant' couldn't be further from the truth. You are asking me to disregard my own beliefs entirely and call a diamond a spade because the diamond wants to be a spade. If you want to refer to him as her, go for it. I prefer not to delude the truth; nothing more. My 'argument' doesn't prove more valid than anyone else's, because it's not an argument. It is me presenting my opinion and why I have that opinion.
[quote=eli]
It's just a shame people still think like this, is all #closeminded[/quote]
I am no more closed-minded to the opinions and beliefs of others than they are to the opinions and beliefs that I am presenting in this thread. On the contrary, I am very open-minded. I don't have to like it to accept it, do I?
I would just like to let anyone who is lurking this thread to know that there exists no scientific basis for the notion of a biological correctness or a biologically correct relationship. Biological phenomena as far as is known are neutral. If you want more information just search the 'naturalistic fallacy'.
I would just like to let anyone who is lurking this thread to know that there exists no scientific basis for the notion of a biological correctness or a biologically correct relationship. Biological phenomena as far as is known are neutral. If you want more information just search the 'naturalistic fallacy'.
smakers
The difference is that generally being obese is correlated to some other traits outside of their weight, such as laziness, eating habits, motivation, etc., while being transgender is not related to any such traits.
Obesity is seen as the RESULT of negative traits, hence people are judged for it.
Being transgender is not the result of anything other than being transgender. It has no bearing on the person inside the body.
[quote=smakers]
[/quote]
The difference is that generally being obese is correlated to some other traits outside of their weight, such as laziness, eating habits, motivation, etc., while being transgender is not related to any such traits.
Obesity is seen as the RESULT of negative traits, hence people are judged for it.
Being transgender is not the result of anything other than being transgender. It has no bearing on the person inside the body.
[/quote]
The difference is that generally being obese is correlated to some other traits outside of their weight, such as laziness, eating habits, motivation, etc., while being transgender is not related to any such traits.
Obesity is seen as the RESULT of negative traits, hence people are judged for it.
Being transgender is not the result of anything other than being transgender. It has no bearing on the person inside the body.
I don't agree with how smaka calls being gay, trans, lesbian, etc "biologically wrong".
Biologically irregular would be a better (and more accurate) way to put it.
I don't agree with how smaka calls being gay, trans, lesbian, etc "biologically wrong".
Biologically irregular would be a better (and more accurate) way to put it.
Biologically irregular would be a better (and more accurate) way to put it.
Honestly, you answered so few of the questions that I asked, I have no idea if you have a real thought or just a forced religious thought. I am done for tonight, but trust I will push you to at least answer more of my questions on WHY (which is so important) you think the way you do. I am assuming that this is going down the road of religion, and I figured that from the start.
Goodnight and until tommorrow, hopefully you will answer a few more things, but for tonight I am done trying to talk back on my phone.
Honestly, you answered so few of the questions that I asked, I have no idea if you have a real thought or just a forced religious thought. I am done for tonight, but trust I will push you to at least answer more of my questions on WHY (which is so important) you think the way you do. I am assuming that this is going down the road of religion, and I figured that from the start.
Goodnight and until tommorrow, hopefully you will answer a few more things, but for tonight I am done trying to talk back on my phone.
Goodnight and until tommorrow, hopefully you will answer a few more things, but for tonight I am done trying to talk back on my phone.
Posting on the behalf of Mustardoverlord and his broken firefox:
"
loljkI would just like to let anyone who is lurking this thread to know that there exists no scientific basis for the notion of a biological correctness or a biologically correct relationship. Biological phenomena as far as is known are neutral. If you want more information just search the 'naturalistic fallacy'.
smaka is saying LGBT individuals are biologically "incorrect"- meaning what? that they are "against" biology? that, if they are evolutionary dead ends, it means they're somehow outside of evolution?
all LGBT individuals were created by sexual reproduction and have undergone genetic recombination and have had the possibility of genetic mutation (though that is rarer). their innate attraction to members of the same gender or their gender identity not matching their body is not more or less "incorrect" than someone with an innate attraction to the opposite gender or someone with a gender identity matching their body
I understand your argument that you still consider them biologically male due to their chromosomes (although saying that gender pronouns are a "scientific" matter is dubious at best), but to say you view LGBT individuals as biologically "incorrect" is not an opinion, it's a misreading of science. how can any genetic dead end be some like affront to "biology" (which is the study of nature not nature itself so it seems like saying something is naturally incorrect would be more accurate which you do not say, maybe as it sounds more bigoted) if it is a byproduct of "biology"?
"
Posting on the behalf of Mustardoverlord and his broken firefox:
"
[quote=loljk]I would just like to let anyone who is lurking this thread to know that there exists no scientific basis for the notion of a biological correctness or a biologically correct relationship. Biological phenomena as far as is known are neutral. If you want more information just search the 'naturalistic fallacy'.[/quote]
smaka is saying LGBT individuals are biologically "incorrect"- meaning what? that they are "against" biology? that, if they are evolutionary dead ends, it means they're somehow outside of evolution?
all LGBT individuals were created by sexual reproduction and have undergone genetic recombination and have had the possibility of genetic mutation (though that is rarer). their innate attraction to members of the same gender or their gender identity not matching their body is not more or less "incorrect" than someone with an innate attraction to the opposite gender or someone with a gender identity matching their body
I understand your argument that you still consider them biologically male due to their chromosomes (although saying that gender pronouns are a "scientific" matter is dubious at best), but to say you view LGBT individuals as biologically "incorrect" is not an opinion, it's a misreading of science. how can any genetic dead end be some like affront to "biology" (which is the study of nature not nature itself so it seems like saying something is naturally incorrect would be more accurate which you do not say, maybe as it sounds more bigoted) if it is a byproduct of "biology"?
"
"
[quote=loljk]I would just like to let anyone who is lurking this thread to know that there exists no scientific basis for the notion of a biological correctness or a biologically correct relationship. Biological phenomena as far as is known are neutral. If you want more information just search the 'naturalistic fallacy'.[/quote]
smaka is saying LGBT individuals are biologically "incorrect"- meaning what? that they are "against" biology? that, if they are evolutionary dead ends, it means they're somehow outside of evolution?
all LGBT individuals were created by sexual reproduction and have undergone genetic recombination and have had the possibility of genetic mutation (though that is rarer). their innate attraction to members of the same gender or their gender identity not matching their body is not more or less "incorrect" than someone with an innate attraction to the opposite gender or someone with a gender identity matching their body
I understand your argument that you still consider them biologically male due to their chromosomes (although saying that gender pronouns are a "scientific" matter is dubious at best), but to say you view LGBT individuals as biologically "incorrect" is not an opinion, it's a misreading of science. how can any genetic dead end be some like affront to "biology" (which is the study of nature not nature itself so it seems like saying something is naturally incorrect would be more accurate which you do not say, maybe as it sounds more bigoted) if it is a byproduct of "biology"?
"
I don't disagree with either point, Benk. The initial point was that it's silly to judge someone when you are part of a group who is pressuring for equality and non-judgment.
I don't disagree with either point, Benk. The initial point was that it's silly to judge someone when you are part of a group who is pressuring for equality and non-judgment.
the amount of hypocrisy in this thread is amazing. this really is the worst thread on tf.tv. let people live the way they want. i don't care if someone is trans, fat, gay, whatever. as long as they don't get in my face about it they can be however they want. smaka is making a good point with his post, i don't expect everybody to be accepting of gay/trans people but as long as they are respectful with their beliefs and don't go all westboro baptist then i respect their opinions.
the amount of hypocrisy in this thread is amazing. this really is the worst thread on tf.tv. let people live the way they want. i don't care if someone is trans, fat, gay, whatever. as long as they don't get in my face about it they can be however they want. smaka is making a good point with his post, i don't expect everybody to be accepting of gay/trans people but as long as they are respectful with their beliefs and don't go all westboro baptist then i respect their opinions.
harbleuthe amount of hypocrisy in this thread is amazing. this really is the worst thread on tf.tv. let people live the way they want. i don't care if someone is trans, fat, gay, whatever. as long as they don't get in my face about it they can be however they want. smaka is making a good point with his post, i don't expect everybody to be accepting of gay/trans people but as long as they are respectful with their beliefs and don't go all westboro baptist then i respect their opinions.
What is the hypocrisy that you refer to in this thread? I have done nothing but but make people understand my POV. What is the good point that he made? He picked one of my 10 arguments that was ignored that I fought from the start.
Meh, screw it, if someone doesn't understand that Smakers thoughts come directly from religion that can argued over and over again, without those people caring about facts, then what is the point?
[quote=harbleu]the amount of hypocrisy in this thread is amazing. this really is the worst thread on tf.tv. let people live the way they want. i don't care if someone is trans, fat, gay, whatever. as long as they don't get in my face about it they can be however they want. smaka is making a good point with his post, i don't expect everybody to be accepting of gay/trans people but as long as they are respectful with their beliefs and don't go all westboro baptist then i respect their opinions.[/quote]
What is the hypocrisy that you refer to in this thread? I have done nothing but but make people understand my POV. What is the good point that he made? He picked one of my 10 arguments that was ignored that I fought from the start.
Meh, screw it, if someone doesn't understand that Smakers thoughts come directly from religion that can argued over and over again, without those people caring about facts, then what is the point?
What is the hypocrisy that you refer to in this thread? I have done nothing but but make people understand my POV. What is the good point that he made? He picked one of my 10 arguments that was ignored that I fought from the start.
Meh, screw it, if someone doesn't understand that Smakers thoughts come directly from religion that can argued over and over again, without those people caring about facts, then what is the point?
M4risa, I agree. Right and wrong are words that introduce morals more than anything, and I primarily used them for lack of coming up with something better. I do think 'irregular' fits more snugly in this context, and I will use that in the future.
F-zero,
I thought I answered a majority of your inquiries, but I responded to so many people at once, I may have skipped some. I don't think the 'why' is all that important, but I will try to answer your questions where possible. My beliefs may have stemmed from childhood religion, but it is not a driving factor at this time.
Benk, et al.
I don't have better terminology for it. I am indeed referring to the genetic dead-end that would arise if homosexuality became the norm. I think of it as a biological irregularity because i use 'biological' as a term that refers to something 'relating to, caused by, or affecting life or living organisms'.
To answer your last question, I suppose I wouldn't call it an affront to biology itself so much as an affront to the longevity of the human race.
I can't stress enough that I'm not trying to say the affected people are bad or wrong, or that I think less of them. They are playing the hand they're dealt, just like everyone. It's not that a homosexual is an affront; just the genetic makeup that causes that attraction. Again, nobody has to share my opinion on this, but it is my opinion, and it's not bigoted in any way.
M4risa, I agree. Right and wrong are words that introduce morals more than anything, and I primarily used them for lack of coming up with something better. I do think 'irregular' fits more snugly in this context, and I will use that in the future.
F-zero,
I thought I answered a majority of your inquiries, but I responded to so many people at once, I may have skipped some. I don't think the 'why' is all that important, but I will try to answer your questions where possible. My beliefs may have stemmed from childhood religion, but it is not a driving factor at this time.
Benk, et al.
I don't have better terminology for it. I am indeed referring to the genetic dead-end that would arise if homosexuality became the norm. I think of it as a biological irregularity because i use 'biological' as a term that refers to something 'relating to, caused by, or affecting life or living organisms'.
To answer your last question, I suppose I wouldn't call it an affront to biology itself so much as an affront to the longevity of the human race.
I can't stress enough that I'm not trying to say the affected people are bad or wrong, or that I think less of them. They are playing the hand they're dealt, just like everyone. It's not that a homosexual is an affront; just the genetic makeup that causes that attraction. Again, nobody has to share my opinion on this, but it is my opinion, and it's not bigoted in any way.
F-zero,
I thought I answered a majority of your inquiries, but I responded to so many people at once, I may have skipped some. I don't think the 'why' is all that important, but I will try to answer your questions where possible. My beliefs may have stemmed from childhood religion, but it is not a driving factor at this time.
Benk, et al.
I don't have better terminology for it. I am indeed referring to the genetic dead-end that would arise if homosexuality became the norm. I think of it as a biological irregularity because i use 'biological' as a term that refers to something 'relating to, caused by, or affecting life or living organisms'.
To answer your last question, I suppose I wouldn't call it an affront to biology itself so much as an affront to the longevity of the human race.
I can't stress enough that I'm not trying to say the affected people are bad or wrong, or that I think less of them. They are playing the hand they're dealt, just like everyone. It's not that a homosexual is an affront; just the genetic makeup that causes that attraction. Again, nobody has to share my opinion on this, but it is my opinion, and it's not bigoted in any way.
holy shit
this is the hardest ive laughed ever
oh my god smaka if your trolling your my hero
holy shit
this is the hardest ive laughed ever
oh my god smaka if your trolling your my hero
this is the hardest ive laughed ever
oh my god smaka if your trolling your my hero
smakersa person with XY chromosomes is male and a person with XX is female
not always :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
theres also people born with xyy and xxy sex chromosomes
[quote=smakers]a person with XY chromosomes is male and a person with XX is female[/quote]
not always :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
theres also people born with xyy and xxy sex chromosomes
not always :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
theres also people born with xyy and xxy sex chromosomes
d_bsmakersa person with XY chromosomes is male and a person with XX is femalenot always :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
theres also people born with xyy and xxy sex chromosomes
dats a meatshot
[quote=d_b][quote=smakers]a person with XY chromosomes is male and a person with XX is female[/quote]
not always :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
theres also people born with xyy and xxy sex chromosomes[/quote]
dats a meatshot
not always :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
theres also people born with xyy and xxy sex chromosomes[/quote]
dats a meatshot
This thread has been locked.