Curried Goats
Diamond Member
- Aug 28, 2021
- 31,242
- 11,295
- 1,283
You have not. You keep confusing procreation with recreational sex.There is no need for you to ask that, when I have done just that numerous times in this thread. lol
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You have not. You keep confusing procreation with recreational sex.There is no need for you to ask that, when I have done just that numerous times in this thread. lol
Not interested in your methodology. Ho hum.My arguments don't rest on name calling. I make an objective argument and then I call you names.
You're also not interested in rational arguments.Not interested in your methodology. Ho hum.
That doesnt refute what I just said. Again, REGARDLESS of why sexual participants are participating in sex, it still remains that nature set sex up as a heterosexual thing, not LGBT.It did not. It set up procreation to require male and female gametes. Procreation and sex are not the same thing. Its natural for humans to desire sexual pleasure even if the goal isn't procreation. There's a whole porn industry that bares that truth.
Now, you are really sinking in this thread. You saw my evidence 10 times already, and YOU KNOW it isnt "mean names". Getting silly shows you dont have a leg to stand on here.See. Your only evidence that homosexuality is unnatural are the mean names you call homosexuals. That's not very compelling evidence.
Goats is a mouthpiece for the left. Nothing more.Now, you are really sinking in this thread. You saw my evidence 10 times already, and YOU KNOW it isnt "mean names". Getting silly shows you dont have a leg to stand on here.
Time for you to fnd another thread. You lost this debate, and its glaring.
No. It set up procreation to require male and female gametes. Oral sex has no purpose for recreation but nearly everyone who engages in it clearly enjoys it. Enjoying and desiring sex is also natural. Even if you're infertile and unable to procreate, even heterosexually it's still natural for you to desire and engage in sex. You haven't refuted anything I've said here end you can't.That doesnt refute what I just said. Again, REGARDLESS of why sexual participants are participating in sex, it still remains that nature set sex up as a heterosexual thing, not LGBT.
Or three or four or five times.....Some people have to be told twice. Ho hum.
You lost. Your argument seems to be that sex is only for procreation and yet nearly every human on the planet will engage in it for natural reasons beyond procreation.Now, you are really sinking in this thread. You saw my evidence 10 times already, and YOU KNOW it isnt "mean names". Getting silly shows you dont have a leg to stand on here.
Time for you to fnd another thread. You lost this debate, and its glaring.
No confusion on my part. You're the one who appears to be confused. And here;s a little advice. Trying to make the claim that LGBT is natural,m despite body parts set up for heterosexual sex, is about the weakest lamebrain thing anybody has ever heard in this forum. I think you are so deep into this, you can't see the obvious.You have not. You keep confusing procreation with recreational sex.
HA HA HA. No, that is not my argument Mr Strawman, but nice try.You lost. Your argument seems to be that sex is only for procreation and yet nearly every human on the planet will engage in it for natural reasons beyond procreation.
MRIs are evidence of brain function that is not all biologically natural.Procreation requires the joining of male and female gametes. Not all sex is intended for the purpose of procreation. The fact that we can see homosexual attraction in MRIs is objective evidence homosexuality is biologically natural.
Your procreation line doesnt fly. Procreation, fun, pleasure, excitement, whatever bucket you want put it in. LGBT is as unnatural as the cow jumping over the moon (or maybe you'd like to tell us that is correct too, huh ?)No. It set up procreation to require male and female gametes. Oral sex has no purpose for recreation but nearly everyone who engages in it clearly enjoys it. Enjoying and desiring sex is also natural. Even if you're infertile and unable to procreate, even heterosexually it's still natural for you to desire and engage in sex. You haven't refuted anything I've said here end you can't.
Or three or four or five times.....
The genitals are full of sensitive areas that give good sensations when rubbed or manipulated. It keeps males and females from killing each other. In fact, those genitals are made to fit each other and stimulate each other. The fact they can be stimulated outside of sex doesn't mean that homosexuality is preferred in nature.No. It set up procreation to require male and female gametes. Oral sex has no purpose for recreation but nearly everyone who engages in it clearly enjoys it. Enjoying and desiring sex is also natural. Even if you're infertile and unable to procreate, even heterosexually it's still natural for you to desire and engage in sex. You haven't refuted anything I've said here end you can't.
Or three or four or five times.....
Calling me names isn't a refutation that we can see homosexual attraction in MRIs.No confusion on my part. You're the one who appears to be confused. And here;s a little advice. Trying to make the claim that LGBT is natural,m despite body parts set up for heterosexual sex, is about the weakest lamebrain thing anybody has ever heard in this forum. I think you are so deep into this, you can't see the obvious.
All you do is call names in lieu of an objective argument.This is what liberals do, Not just with LGBT, but n many different issues, they come up with these really oddball notions about things, and then claim them to be reality. It's THEIR reality, and nothing more.
What? LolYour procreation line doesnt fly. Procreation, fun, pleasure, excitement, whatever bucket you want put it in. LGBT is as unnatural as the cow jumping over the moon (or maybe you'd like to tell us that is correct too, huh ?)
Look at you talking about calling names ? HA HA HA. You might have just set a record for name calling, in this thread.Calling me names isn't a refutation that we can see homosexual attraction in MRIs.
All you do is call names in lieu of an objective argument.
What? Lol
Again. You need to be clearer. What exactly are you arguing is unnatural about homosexual attraction?MRIs are evidence of brain function that is not all biologically natural.
It does not. Men and women, well men a lot more than women really but regardless, men and women kill each other all the time, especially in fits of rage over jealously and hurt with regards to sex and intimacy. They even coin a term for it, "crimes of passion".The genitals are full of sensitive areas that give good sensations when rubbed or manipulated. It keeps males and females from killing each other.
It doesn't mean it's eschewed by nature either. You keep trying to argue this straw man about heterosexuals being more numerous but no one is refuting that.In fact, those genitals are made to fit each other and stimulate each other. The fact they can be stimulated outside of sex doesn't mean that homosexuality is preferred in nature.
Let's talk about the Dodgers and what is to be done about them.The genitals are full of sensitive areas that give good sensations when rubbed or manipulated. It keeps males and females from killing each other. In fact, those genitals are made to fit each other and stimulate each other. The fact they can be stimulated outside of sex doesn't mean that homosexuality is preferred in nature.