BARRSTARDS !!!!!!

Define "unnatural". This is key to your argument, so it has to be clear and beyond question. Surely?
 
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Let's try that Sherlock Holmes thing of removing a few things to see what's left.

Is contraception unnatural?
Is w*nking unnatural?
Is watching porn unnatural?
Is artificial insemination unnatural?
Is IVF unnatural?
Is hip replacement unnatural?
Is appendectomy unnatural...

etc
etc
etc.

What is "unnatural" :confused:
 
Homosexual parenting IS. That's unnatural.
How do you know? Where's your evidence as to what is or is not natural?

It may well be statistically "unusual", but this doesn't make it "unnatural"

Where's your evidence to show its beneficial or damaging?????

None.
Where's your evidence that it's "unnatural". Where's your evidence that it's beneficial or damaging? None, so why assume the worst and expect problems?

Anyway, we're going to have to agree to differ you pointless shirt lifter ;) :LOL: :LOL:

(PS - I don't like bickering with you - you're my friend) :confused: :)
 
If you want to know what is 'natural' for homo-sapiens then you need to go back to hunter-gatherer communities and see what they do. What is considered 'natural' for us modern lot has been imposed by religion and government and is not 'natural' at all.
 
If you want to know what is 'natural' for homo-sapiens then you need to go back to hunter-gatherer communities and see what they do. What is considered 'natural' for us modern lot has been imposed by religion and government and is not 'natural' at all.
Are you only going back to "communities"? ;)

If that's what the starting point is, then it implies that the groups organise themselves and elect or permit a "leader" to make decisions in the best interest of the collective based on intellectual, experiential and insight (i.e gut feeling!). These aspects of leadership pretty much reflect political and religious rights, rites and mandates.

In the interest of expanding the size of the original groups and for populations to be, er, repopulated after plagues, heterosexual activities are obviously more beneficial that homosexual practices. Whether the subsequent nurturing of the children is better done by one parental model or not is under scrutiny.

On the whole, it does seem to make more sense logistically for there to be at least two people involved who can provide not only the material support required but also alternative viewpoints, reinforcement of arguments or a calming down of conflict when "discussing" a child's behaviour. Whether these two people ought to be of different gender is questionable.
 
Whether the subsequent nurturing of the children is better done by one parental model or not is under scrutiny.

Yes it is, the thread moved onto 'Heterosexual parenting good, homosexual parenting bad'. An argument presented being 'heterosexual parenting natural, homosexual parenting unnatural'.

Whereas if the truth be told, neither are natural. The nuclear family that we are told is 'natural' was imposed upon us because religion and government decided so. Kids would naturally be looked after in a creche environment and mainly by a load of teenagers.
 
What a load of ****e. There's nothing natural about two blokes doing each other up the chuff or poking each other in the chops. And as for them adopting children the people promoting that should be shot :evil:
 
What a load of s***te. There's nothing natural about two blokes doing each other up the chuff or poking each other in the chops. And as for them adopting children the people promoting that should be shot :evil:
I trust that you also feel that sodomy and oral sex is also "unnatural" between heterosexual couples and that any happily married couple who happen to enjoy either of these sorts of activity should be prevented from having children on those grounds.

There are a whole load of things that people do that aren't "natural", depending how you want to conveniently define it. Let's pick on a tiny number of related ones - how about sticking rubber sheath's on your knob or taking chemicals designed to prevent or abort pregnancy. How does that fit into your definition of "natural"?

How about caesarian section births? How about any operation?

Are these conveniently natural for you? Or are you just being selective to prove what a narrow minded jerk off you are? :mrgreen:
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top