Whatever you feel like man

[Piotr]

There is only one animal were there is homosexuality...humans. So one could reason its not natural

Wrong. There are quite a few. Dogs and Cats exhibit homosexual behavior. So do Dolphins (also one of the most intelligent animals.), Garter Snakes, Salmon, and Gulls. Also, if it exists in nature, it's natural.

i call BS on this because you obviously don't know how salmon reproduce. They don't have to have you-know-what to reproduce. The female's lays eggs, and the males just shoot there seed into the water. Since they don't have you-know-what, they don't have any you-know orientation

Edit: salmon also die after reproducing, so there lives are based purely on instinct and have no room for homosexual behavior

Just wanted to say, I do know how salmon reproduce. Do not call BS on something you yourself no little about. You said humans are the only animals to exhibit homosexual behavior. I have a list, of animals that do. Even if Salmon in fact didn't exhibit homosexual behavior, what do you have to say for the other animals I listed?

Sorry for detailing the thread, but I try to correct false information wherever possible.

You do know how salmon reproduce yet you claim that they show homosexual behaviour? There's not much wrong with being mistaken, but if you repeat an obvious lie you will get in trouble.

About the other animals you listed, their normal natural behaviour is to have heterosexual intercourses, being gay is abnormal for them.

If you want to correct false information in the future, you should provide further evidence. BB called a lie AND provided logical reasoning, you simply repeated your claims.

[Birdbrain]

There is only one animal were there is homosexuality...humans. So one could reason its not natural

Wrong. There are quite a few. Dogs and Cats exhibit homosexual behavior. So do Dolphins (also one of the most intelligent animals.), Garter Snakes, Salmon, and Gulls. Also, if it exists in nature, it's natural.

i call BS on this because you obviously don't know how salmon reproduce. They don't have to have you-know-what to reproduce. The female's lays eggs, and the males just shoot there seed into the water. Since they don't have you-know-what, they don't have any you-know orientation

Edit: salmon also die after reproducing, so there lives are based purely on instinct and have no room for homosexual behavior

Just wanted to say, I do know how salmon reproduce. Do not call BS on something you yourself no little about. You said humans are the only animals to exhibit homosexual behavior. I have a list, of animals that do. Even if Salmon in fact didn't exhibit homosexual behavior, what do you have to say for the other animals I listed?

Sorry for detailing the thread, but I try to correct false information wherever possible.

i was actually surprised because I know so much about animals, and yet I had never heard of this. Most other animals (save for dolphins and a few others) only have you-know-what to mate. Not for fun. So why would they? And I only said I stand corrected after someone said there was a bi penguin in captivity

[ZeroNero]

There is only one animal were there is homosexuality...humans. So one could reason its not natural

Wrong. There are quite a few. Dogs and Cats exhibit homosexual behavior. So do Dolphins (also one of the most intelligent animals.), Garter Snakes, Salmon, and Gulls. Also, if it exists in nature, it's natural.

i call BS on this because you obviously don't know how salmon reproduce. They don't have to have you-know-what to reproduce. The female's lays eggs, and the males just shoot there seed into the water. Since they don't have you-know-what, they don't have any you-know orientation

Edit: salmon also die after reproducing, so there lives are based purely on instinct and have no room for homosexual behavior

Just wanted to say, I do know how salmon reproduce. Do not call BS on something you yourself no little about. You said humans are the only animals to exhibit homosexual behavior. I have a list, of animals that do. Even if Salmon in fact didn't exhibit homosexual behavior, what do you have to say for the other animals I listed?

Sorry for detailing the thread, but I try to correct false information wherever possible.

i was actually surprised because I know so much about animals, and yet I had never heard of this. Most other animals (save for dolphins and a few others) only have you-know-what to mate. Not for fun. So why would they? And I only said I stand corrected after someone said there was a bi penguin in captivity

Okay I will apologize Birdbrain. And I hope there will be no hard feelings. I admit my last post was... Rather harsh. So, my apologies there.

As for Piotr, I will concede that Birdbrain was right and I was in the wrong about Salmon behavior. But, I never claimed that it wasn't abnormal for animals to exhibit homosexual behavior. Just that some species do. Thus, it is natural because it exists in nature.

[Birdbrain]

Piotr just said those animals don't do that in the wild. Provide proof they do

[Double-O-Scotch]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

[Piotr]

Piotr just said those animals don't do that in the wild.

No I didn't, I said they normal behaviour in nature is not to have homosexual intercourses. Animals can be deviated from norm same as humans.

[Mentonin]

And is there a problem in being abnormal?

[Piotr]

In general, no. In the particular case of homosexuality I would argue that yes, as it prevents spreading of the genes which are responsible for the making of the host homosexual.

[Mentonin]

If it is just genes. I believe there are. Other factors as well

[Birdbrain]

In general, no. In the particular case of homosexuality I would argue that yes, as it prevents spreading of the genes which are responsible for the making of the host homosexual.

genes don't make someone homosexual. You said it yourself, its not natural. So how can it be passed through genes? Your statement seems contradictory to what you said earlier

Ill even argue with people who have close to the same view as me if they say something contradictory, or doesn't make sense

[Piotr]

In general, no. In the particular case of homosexuality I would argue that yes, as it prevents spreading of the genes which are responsible for the making of the host homosexual.

genes don't make someone homosexual.

I never said so: genes responsible for the making (as in, having heterosexual intercourse to breed the host, or as in building up the DNA and RNA of the host) of the host are all host's genes, not just some. Whether some of them are responsible for the host's homosexuality is irrelevant to the proof. The genes are the 'victim'

[Mentonin]

In general, no. In the particular case of homosexuality I would argue that yes, as it prevents spreading of the genes which are responsible for the making of the host homosexual.

genes don't make someone homosexual. You said it yourself, its not natural. So how can it be passed through genes? Your statement seems contradictory to what you said earlier

Ill even argue with people who have close to the same view as me if they say something contradictory, or doesn't make sense

Being colorblind isn't natural, and is passed by genes

[Piotr]

In general, no. In the particular case of homosexuality I would argue that yes, as it prevents spreading of the genes which are responsible for the making of the host homosexual.

genes don't make someone homosexual. You said it yourself, its not natural. So how can it be passed through genes? Your statement seems contradictory to what you said earlier

Ill even argue with people who have close to the same view as me if they say something contradictory, or doesn't make sense

Being colorblind isn't natural, and is passed by genes

I learned the hard way that some people have very different definition of 'natural' than me. Some people define natural as physical (as in the laws of physics), contrary to spiritual, which is angels and ghosts and dragons and stuff. In other words, if something is real then it is natural. In emotional sense natural is neither positive or negative to me, it can be both to the extreme. Under that definition homosexuality is natural, in a negative way looking from the genes' perspective. I used to define natural as something occurring in nature as a norm rather than an exception, but I think the proper word for that is abnormal, defined as deviated from the norm.

[Gorzo]

In general, no. In the particular case of homosexuality I would argue that yes, as it prevents spreading of the genes which are responsible for the making of the host homosexual.

genes don't make someone homosexual. You said it yourself, its not natural. So how can it be passed through genes? Your statement seems contradictory to what you said earlier

Ill even argue with people who have close to the same view as me if they say something contradictory, or doesn't make sense

Genes do matter. Recessive traits have interesting ways of popping up. For example, my mother has green eyes. My father has brown eyes. My brother and I both have blue eyes. Green eyes are double-recessive, so the blue had to have come from my father. (And yes, he is my real father lol. My brother looks just like him, and I have many traits of my grandparents on that side) my grandparents' eyes were both brown. Their parents eyes were all brown. We -think- my grandfather's grandfather -might- have had blue eyes.

And homosexuals do pass on their genes. Not always, of course, but it happens. It is not unheard of for a father with wife and children to come out as gay. Hell, it happens in .politics. pretty often. Not to mention the passing of DNA through artificial means - surrogate mother and artificial insemination and such.

I guess my bottom line is "crazy world - stuff happens." Never assume that any group of people will fit one mold that you make for them in your mind. There are ALWAYS exceptions when it comes to the human race.

[Piotr]

I guess my bottom line is "crazy world - stuff happens." Never assume that any group of people will fit one mold that you make for them in your mind. There are ALWAYS exceptions when it comes to the human race.

True, but it doesn't disprove that being homosexual significantly decreases the chance of spreading their genes, does it?