ChaoticEnigma1121
112478
1747
78
Oct 10, 2021 3:46 PM
ChaoticEnigma1121
112478
1747
78
BronkLuonk
Nobody thinks gay people are a mistake.
FixedsysLabs
God isn't real and there's no eternal justice. We CAN judge them.
Easykehl
This is why they are (were?) so focused on saying homosexuality is a choice. They don’t believe G-dawg made them that way; they chose to sin
musmire75
True, but again, theres some dude with superiority complex impersonating higher entity on twitter
awesomecat42
It's a well-known comedy account, not some dude on a power trip.
SarcasticRN
VirtualNaut
PhooBar
"We apologize for the inconvenience."
Thereminista
Definitely true in the first place. A very large number of land animals have gender flipped members. It's on the variety spectrum of life.
thebigbaka
PriestofThor
Randy Feltface. One hilarious Australian puppet.
DarthGoodguy
I desperately want to see this whole thing
thebigbaka
Randy feltface https://youtu.be/dLVvKB6u3Wc
pollypocketfullofposies
I've heard some say they consider it a mental illness. Ironically the only mental illness they think is real.
GaySocialistLiberalMuslimCommieAtheist
Yup, depression: "just think happy thoughts then" gee thanks Dave, you solved my suicidal depression.
DildoRodeo
I barely survived the mindset of "I should go ahead and kill myself since they don't believe I want to". Thankfully I've grown a little.
DaisyfromDownunder
What too you so long to admit this blunder? What's next?
madcatii
Toro1d
Damn, big J has a divine 6-pack!
Nunyajonesinc
And not just humans. Homosexuality is a common trait in numerous species
Kbantar
It does appear to be most common among social species, IIRC. Though bisexuality seems to be FAR more common than exclusive homosexuality.
alrightalrightalrightpartyatthemoontower
First year college. I was like oh plants and animals are kinda on a spectrum. Cool.
Kbantar
Depending on definition, it's kind of been seen even in some very simple parasites. Some will only attempt to mate with the same sex.
ItSeemsYouHaveSufferedaTerribleFate
That's not going to get thru to any of them because they probably see homosexuality as 'being lured by satan' and 'a trial to overcome' or
ItSeemsYouHaveSufferedaTerribleFate
some insane bull crap like that.
Becker37
Don't y'all know that anything bad is of the devil? Or so they say...
ilhares
And yet "the word of God" clearly states that He is the creator of all things, the good and the evil.
Becker37
The Bible is full of conflicting information
ilhares
Poorly written fiction is often like that.
Becker37
True
MrFancyPanzer
ZippidyDooDa
You guys know you are an echo chaimber too, right. This is as stupid as saying “all Muslims are terrorists”. Love, a gay Christian
MrFancyPanzer
I know not all Christians are like this, just pointing out the hypocrisy of homophobic ones who conveniently ignore parts of the Bible.
PlasmaSquirrel
Fuck the Bible. But, gawd-damn if Jesus wasn't out there fighting for the freaky-deaky. My kind of dude
PleaseRespectMyAsshole
It also says not to wear mixed fabrics. Everyone is fucked on that one alone.
GondwanaCraton
There are no Christians. There are only Pick-and-choosians. They pick what they want, still fail to live up to it, and discard the rest.
CelestialSea
It did not say that until the '40s when they changed, "Man should not lay with boys as he does a woman." to "...lay with men..."
CelestialSea
The prohibition is against pedophilia, not homosexuality. But the GOP's really managed to get that one backwards!
Munchman347
Well, priests were involved in the change, so...
DiminishingCapacity
From what I recall, experts say the "no homo" part was translated wrong from an original's Greek's "no pedo"
ghostlight
It's a translation of the Greek "male-bed", a portmanteau that we know only from the Bible so we have no idea what the author actually meant
ghostlight
But, given that it appears next to another word associated with male prostitutes, a general idea is that it's about the men who use them.
magicrhombus
The "no pedo" part is in the NT. The "no homo" part is in the OT.
ZeroZeta
The bible says: "No Homo"? Then that makes being homo alright, right?
VirtualNaut
No, it’s when you do a gay act you say No Homo. Then it’s alright.
RamsesMCMXCI
Not really. It says no homo specifically and then says love everyone. Christians just like to hate because that's what they've been taught.
PlasmaSquirrel
It actually translates to that a man shall not sleep with the yourh, particularly boys, as layef with thy own wives. But "gay" wasn't a term
PlasmaSquirrel
Being that of wives.
RamsesMCMXCI
I've heard from an Israeli that that's not actually accurate, so I don't know what to believe honestly.
HorseMcFucker
There Is no such part in the NT. I quite like the thought that new-age christian homophobes imply that Jesus' sacrifice wasn't good.
confanity
There's no such part in the actual Bible either, regardless of what the Greek fanfics have to say.
PlasmaSquirrel
If we don't sin, Jesus died in vain, right?
VirtualNaut
FatPikachuIsBestPikachu
Yeah the basic principle is that jesus diez to exonerate us from our sins, committed and will commit and to absolve us of the laws of the OT
MasterMookie
Pretty cool you forgave your god and think he is cool dude for all the shitty things he did for centuries before.
BatsArentBugs
Oof. That’s a hot take I’ll need a minute with.
MasterMookie
Get back to me with your findings. I still can't find any reason why people are chill with it.
FatPikachuIsBestPikachu
Pretty cool someone stated a fact about a religion and you had to get passive aggressive and judgy.
MasterMookie
Pretty cool I can't be allowed to comment about moral conundrums in religions that usually dictate how I should live my life.
VirtualNaut
Pretty cool response
crazymojomonkey
And if natural selection is true then homosexuals should die out eventually because the genes won't be passed along
brownribbon
Read up on the Gay Uncle Theory.
crazymojomonkey
Thanks I'll check it out
SirButcher
FYI: Homosexuals aren't sterile.
crazymojomonkey
Indeed, I'm referring to the principles purely, not "real world" application.
Kbantar
You are assuming social groups don't exist, only individuals. Genetics of a species is a HELL of a lot more complex than you think.
crazymojomonkey
I'm not assuming that at all-I'm focusing on a facet of Darwinism and what appears to be a paradox within it. Then everyone lost their mind
Kbantar
It's only a paradox if you forget that species and gene survival is not just based on any particular individual but groups.
ExtremeCowEnthusiast
But this doesn't happen, gay species tend to adopt abandoned babies of their own species. Penguins do this often, and so do many
ExtremeCowEnthusiast
Other species. This is likely an innate thing thats in the human genetics. Not based on an individuals genetics, but the genetic code that
ExtremeCowEnthusiast
All humans share. I'd say it's definitely not a recessive gene or whatever, it's just part of genetic code as a whole.
CaptainSomebody
There's no such thing as a 'gay gene' people are just gay, and natural selection is absolutely true. What a weird statement.
erikleorga
crazymojomonkey
http://imgur.com/LGHMKKn
Jace99
No, in animal studies the more overpopulated the colony becomes, the more homosexual behaviour is observed. It’s natural population control.
crazymojomonkey
I've seen that (though my info is very old) but I don't think that could be genetic (that'd be Lamarkism) so it's behavioral. Right?
Jace99
I’m honestly not sure what the mechanism is and neither were the authors of the research but the results were consistent. Maybe a survival >
Jace99
> mechanism built into mammals? Overpopulation is a threat because of limited resources? I read it years ago at University and haven’t been>
Jace99
able to find it on line but it predicted that by 2020 as many as 20% of the population or 1/5. It’s not that high but we’re getting close.
awesomecat42
There's more to what makes a person then their genes and their choices.
crazymojomonkey
I don't think anyone's disputed that
awesomecat42
Your initial question seems to, whether you meant it to or not. It's saying: "being gay is a choice!" That's why people are mad at you.
PennysWorthOfTea
Except there isn't a "gay gene". Your understanding of biology--both evolution and sexual orientation--are extremely flawed.
crazymojomonkey
Your understanding of my posts is extremely flawed. I've been asking questions and making observations based on the replies. You've assigned
crazymojomonkey
Intention and meaning. And somehow I'm supposed to be a 'bad guy' Honestly does anyone understand engaging in dialog or is it all dogma?
LurkersAssemble
100% dogma and a band-wagon behavior. They see downvotes, they don't even read the comment, just blindly downvote too.
awesomecat42
Your questions seem very disingenuous though. You've set up an untrue binary: "either being gay is a choice or natural selection (cont.)
awesomecat42
isn't real." But that's not how the real world works. You're assuming all things that aren't choices are genetic, which isn't true.
Kube420
That makes no sense since being gay isn't contingent on having a gay parent
obviouslyrob
It doesn't make sense for a lot of reasons.
crazymojomonkey
So you don't think people are born gay?
Kube420
Idk the science isn't out, are you telling me only gay people have gay kids?
awesomecat42
Some of the science is out, and it tells us 2 things: It's not genetics, and it can't be changed once the person is born. (cont.)
awesomecat42
The leading hypothesis is that it's related to in-utero development, but mostly it doesn't matter and you should just respect people.
crazymojomonkey
I'm saying that if people are born gay there must be a genetic predisposition for it. Genes are passed most often by sexual reproduction-
crazymojomonkey
At least that has been the way until recent history. So I'm simply saying sexual reproduction is not typically associated with homosexuality
LurkersAssemble
It's not genetic, identical twins share the same DNA but not always the same sexual preferences. If it's not nature, it has to be nurture.
fuelpergallon
Do a quick read up on epigenetics.