Dodgers Remove Gay 'Nun' Group From Pride Night

[elektra]

Simply saying yes isn't a refutation of anything else I said you dumb Bingo. If nature allows for homosexuality, which it does, then it's natural.

Simply saying nature allows, does not refute a thing. First you must define this force, nature, that you believe in. And then you must show that there are no abnormalities in nature. Then you must show how that which you construct within your thinking, animals also construct and think the same way.

simply saying nature, does not validate or prove your opinion.

 

[HeyNorm]

What you find on the internet to support your opinion is meaningless.

Most men? That makes it right? Well, most men by an overwhelming majority love women and will never give up natural sex. So by your reasoning, homosexuality is a perversion.

Statistics dictate what is right, as you have pointed out, so by your rule, homosexuality is definitely a perversion.

You have to understand. Joe thinks semen is a condiment.

 

[protectionist]

And what's unnatural about relationships that don't you Bingo?

They are contrary to the body parts which are designed by nature, for HETEROsexual sex.

 

[protectionist]

Simply saying yes isn't a refutation of anything else I said you dumb Bingo. If nature allows for homosexuality, which it does, then it's natural.

Nature DOES NOT allow for homosexuality. It is clearly set up fpr HETEROsexuality. Duh! This is the basis of homosexuality's unnaturalness. Contrary to the natural DESIGN.

 

[protectionist]

Through biology just like every other biological process.

That is exactly how it does NOT do that.

 

[Curried Goats]

They are contrary to the body parts which are designed by nature, for HETEROsexual sex.

Nature also designed oral sex to be pleasurable. You can pretend to deny that but you're unlikely to convince very many people who've experienced oral sex. Heterosexual sex might be the only natural way to procreate but procreation is not the only motivation for sex. In fact the vast majority of sexual encounters do not result in procreation.

Nature DOES NOT allow for homosexuality.

It does even if it makes you sad.

It is clearly set up fpr HETEROsexuality. Duh! This is the basis of homosexuality's unnaturalness. Contrary to the natural DESIGN.

Procreation is set up to require both male and female gametes. Human intimacy however can span the spectrum.

That is exactly how it does NOT do that.

 

[Curried Goats]

Simply saying nature allows, does not refute a thing. First you must define this force, nature, that you believe in.

Sure.

What is Nature?.

Nature, in the broadest sense, is equivalent to the natural world, physical world, or material world. "Nature" refers to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general. It ranges in scale from the subatomic to the cosmic.

The term "nature" may refer to living plants and animals, geological processes, weather, and physics, such as matter and energy. The term is often refers to the "natural environment" or wilderness—wild animals, rocks, forest, beaches, and in general areas that have not been substantially altered by humans, or which persist despite human intervention. For, example, manufactured objects and human interaction are generally not considered part of nature, unless qualified as, for example, "human nature" or "the whole of nature". This more traditional concept of "nature" implies a distinction between natural and artificial elements of the Earth, with the artificial as that which has been brought into being by a human consciousness or a human mind.

And then you must show that there are no abnormalities in nature.

Now its your turn. What do you mean by abnormalities? Do you mean that nature creates some things more than others? For instance because nature creates more right handed people than left handed people it's perfectly okay and rational to say left handed people are abnormal, but you'd simply be saying there are more right handed people than there are left handed people. That's a perfectly true statement. You wouldn't be saying nature was wrong for creating left handed people. That would not be a scientifically sound statement. That would be an argument about subjective morality, not science.

In the same vein nature creates more heterosexual people than homosexual people but nature isn't wrong for creating homosexual people. That would be another moral judgment and moral judgments are not scientific arguments. They are not objective observations about nature which are neutral and dispassionate. We don't say nature is wrong from crashing a meteor into the planet and wiping out life, or for creating tornadoes, or wildfires. It's not wrong for creating left handed people, red heads or homosexuals. Biology is a chemical process that acts according to physics, not your feelings.

Then you must show how that which you construct within your thinking, animals also construct and think the same way.

What? I don't know what you're even asking here.

simply saying nature, does not validate or prove your opinion.

It does you dumb Bingo. Nature creates the entire natural world around you. If it exists naturally its because nature created it. Things nature couldn't create you wouldn't see because they wouldn't exist. You can see homosexuals exist and thus you can be sure nature allows for it.

 

[elektra]

Sure.

What is Nature?.

Nature, in the broadest sense, is equivalent to the natural world, physical world, or material world. "Nature" refers to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general. It ranges in scale from the subatomic to the cosmic.

The term "nature" may refer to living plants and animals, geological processes, weather, and physics, such as matter and energy. The term is often refers to the "natural environment" or wilderness—wild animals, rocks, forest, beaches, and in general areas that have not been substantially altered by humans, or which persist despite human intervention. For, example, manufactured objects and human interaction are generally not considered part of nature, unless qualified as, for example, "human nature" or "the whole of nature". This more traditional concept of "nature" implies a distinction between natural and artificial elements of the Earth, with the artificial as that which has been brought into being by a human consciousness or a human mind.

Now its your turn. What do you mean by abnormalities? Do you mean that nature creates some things more than others? For instance because nature creates more right handed people than left handed people it's perfectly okay and rational to say left handed people are abnormal, but you'd simply be saying there are more right handed people than there are left handed people. That's a perfectly true statement. You wouldn't be saying nature was wrong for creating left handed people. That would not be a scientifically sound statement. That would be an argument about subjective morality, not science.

In the same vein nature creates more heterosexual people than homosexual people but nature isn't wrong for creating homosexual people. That would be another moral judgment and moral judgments are not scientific arguments. They are not objective observations about nature which are neutral and dispassionate. We don't say nature is wrong from crashing a meteor into the planet and wiping out life, or for creating tornadoes, wildfires. It's not wrong for creating left handed people, red heads or homosexuals. Biology is a chemical process that acts according to physics, not your feelings.

What? I don't know what you're even asking here.

It does you dumb Bingo. Nature creates the entire natural world around you. If it exists naturally its because nature created it. Things nature couldn't create you wouldn't see because they wouldn't exist. You can see homosexual exist and thus you can be sure nature allows for it.

Nice, you can copy and paste from a google search. That does not explain nature as you are using the word.

Moslems stone homosexuals to death, using your opinion of nature, than that is the natural thing to do with homosexuals.

I already explained what is normal and abnormal in the context of which you have asked.

Homosexuality in dogs and pigs, nope, that is your imagination and anyone else that believes as such or concocts a study claiming as much.

 

[Curried Goats]

Nice, you can copy and paste from a google search.

That does not explain nature as you are using the word.

It does. I'm using the same definition presented at that link.

I already explained what is normal and abnormal in the context of which you have asked.

No you have not. Saying there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals is a true statement. Saying homosexuality is a mistake of nature is not. Nature doesn't make mistakes. What you perceive as mistakes are your subjective feelings. Nature creates what physics allows and does not create what physics does not allow.

Homosexuality in dogs and pigs, nope, that is your imagination and anyone else that believes as such or concocts a study claiming as much.

Denial isn't a counter argument.

 

[elektra]

It does. I'm using the same definition presented at that link.

No you have not. Saying there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals is a true statement. Saying homosexuality is a mistake of nature is not. Nature doesn't make mistakes. What you perceive as mistakes are your subjective feelings. Nature creates what physics allows and does not create what physics does not allow.

Denial isn't a counter argument.

putting words in another's mouth is not an argument, I have not used the word, "mistake"

subjective feelings, is more aptly applied to you opinion that homosexuality exists within the animal kingdom because you saw two dogs dry humping

And no, you are not using the definition in the link. You are using the word Nature, as if there is a god moving chess pieces.

 

[Curried Goats]

putting words in another's mouth is not an argument, I have not used the word, "mistake"

subjective feelings, is more aptly applied to you opinion that homosexuality exists within the animal kingdom because you saw two dogs dry humping

And no, you are not using the definition in the link. You are using the word Nature, as if there is a god moving chess pieces.

No. Nature is the opposite of God you dumb Bingo. It isn't intelligent design, its blind design. It is my argument that homosexuality exists and that it exists in nature. I still don't know what your argument is. Do you think homosexuality doesn't exist? And if it does exist then where does it from if not nature?

 

[Leo123]

Screw 'Pride Night.'

No. Nature is the opposite of God you dumb Bingo. It isn't intelligent design, its blind design. It is my argument that homosexuality exists and that it exists in nature. I still don't know what your argument is. Do you think homosexuality doesn't exist? And if it does exist then where does it from if not nature?

Define 'blind design'....

 

[elektra]

No. Nature is the opposite of God you dumb Bingo. It isn't intelligent design, its blind design. It is my argument that homosexuality exists and that it exists in nature. I still don't know what your argument is. Do you think homosexuality doesn't exist? And if it does exist then where does it from if not nature?

Homosexuality, you have stated your opinion, you have not presented an argument.

Sorry, but dogs dry humping is not homosexuality.

No matter how many times you repeat your declaration, you wont change it into fact.

 

[Curried Goats]

Screw 'Pride Night.'

Define 'blind design'....

It means nature doesn't have a right way or a wrong way to be. The same nature that is responsible for biological life is the same nature that is responsible for the meteor that strikes and wipes it all out. It isn't doing any of these things on purpose, it's just following physics.

 

[Curried Goats]

Homosexuality, you have stated your opinion, you have not presented an argument.

Sorry, but dogs dry humping is not homosexuality.

No matter how many times you repeat your declaration, you wont change it into fact.

You seem to be hung up on me saying homosexuality exists throughout the animal kingdom and keep going back to animals. Homosexual humans exist. If same sex animals, which humans are, we are animals evolved from great apes, I'm sorry but that's a fact.... but if men bring attracted to and having sex with other men and women being attracted to and having sex with other women isn't how you're defining homosexuality than how are you defining it?

 

[protectionist]

Nature also designed oral sex to be pleasurable. You can pretend to deny that but you're unlikely to convince very many people who've experienced oral sex. Heterosexual sex might be the only natural way to procreate but procreation is not the only motivation for sex. In fact the vast majority of sexual encounters do not result in procreation.

It does even if it makes you sad.

Procreation is set up to require both male and female gametes. Human intimacy however can span the spectrum.

Procreation or no procreation, the body parts are designed by nature for heterosexual sex. Penises and vaginas match up together. Other scenarios don't.

Sure.

What is Nature?.

Nature, in the broadest sense, is equivalent to the natural world, physical world, or material world. "Nature" refers to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general. It ranges in scale from the subatomic to the cosmic.

The term "nature" may refer to living plants and animals, geological processes, weather, and physics, such as matter and energy. The term is often refers to the "natural environment" or wilderness—wild animals, rocks, forest, beaches, and in general areas that have not been substantially altered by humans, or which persist despite human intervention. For, example, manufactured objects and human interaction are generally not considered part of nature, unless qualified as, for example, "human nature" or "the whole of nature". This more traditional concept of "nature" implies a distinction between natural and artificial elements of the Earth, with the artificial as that which has been brought into being by a human consciousness or a human mind.

Now its your turn. What do you mean by abnormalities? Do you mean that nature creates some things more than others? For instance because nature creates more right handed people than left handed people it's perfectly okay and rational to say left handed people are abnormal, but you'd simply be saying there are more right handed people than there are left handed people. That's a perfectly true statement. You wouldn't be saying nature was wrong for creating left handed people. That would not be a scientifically sound statement. That would be an argument about subjective morality, not science.

In the same vein nature creates more heterosexual people than homosexual people but nature isn't wrong for creating homosexual people. That would be another moral judgment and moral judgments are not scientific arguments. They are not objective observations about nature which are neutral and dispassionate. We don't say nature is wrong from crashing a meteor into the planet and wiping out life, or for creating tornadoes, or wildfires. It's not wrong for creating left handed people, red heads or homosexuals. Biology is a chemical process that acts according to physics, not your feelings.

What? I don't know what you're even asking here.

It does you dumb Bingo. Nature creates the entire natural world around you. If it exists naturally its because nature created it. Things nature couldn't create you wouldn't see because they wouldn't exist. You can see homosexuals exist and thus you can be sure nature allows for it.

One of the problems that liberals have is they think too much. Even the best of endeavors go awry when they overload their capacities.

You can tell yourself that homosexuality is consistent with nature, 24/7, and until you are blue in face. It never will be that. Go ahead thinking your scatterbrained notions, as long as you don't bother anybody with it (that includes men in womens' sports, men in womens' bathrooms, and the ludicrous Shame parades, ridiculously called "Pride" by LGBTs. (what is there to be proud of ? being a sex pervert ?)

 

[protectionist]

It means nature doesn't have a right way or a wrong way to be. The same nature that is responsible for biological life is the same nature that is responsible for the meteor that strikes and wipes it all out. It isn't doing any of these things on purpose, it's just following physics.

Keep twisting, rationalizing, pretending, if it makes you feel better.

 

[protectionist]

No. Nature is the opposite of God you dumb Bingo. It isn't intelligent design, its blind design. It is my argument that homosexuality exists and that it exists in nature. I still don't know what your argument is. Do you think homosexuality doesn't exist? And if it does exist then where does it from if not nature?

It exists outside the parameters of nature. It exists in NON-nature, a concocted, fabricated, abnormal scenario, by mentally deranged loons who tell themselves and each other, that they are normal.

 

[Curried Goats]

Procreation or no procreation, the body parts are designed by nature for heterosexual sex. Penises and vaginas match up together. Other scenarios don't.

Which only matters if your concern is procreation. People have sex for reasons beyond procreation. Try not to cry too much about it.

One of the problems that liberals have is they think too much. Even the best of endeavors go awry when they overload their capacities.

There is never anything wrong with thinking too much.

You can tell yourself that homosexuality is consistent with nature, 24/7, and until you are blue in face. It never will be that.

How could homosexuality exist if nature didn't allow for it?

Go ahead thinking your scatterbrained notions, as long as you don't bother anybody with it (that includes men in womens' sports, men in womens' bathrooms, and the ludicrous Shame parades, ridiculously called "Pride" by LGBTs. (what is there to be proud of ? being a sex pervert ?)

No one gives a shit what you think you Bingo. You lost. The mainstream world recognizes the legitimacy of homosexuality.

 

[Curried Goats]

It exists outside the parameters of nature. It exists in NON-nature, a concocted, fabricated, abnormal scenario, by mentally deranged loons who tell themselves and each other, that they are normal.

What exactly is NON-nature? Is that where you send everything in your psyche that threatens your safe space?