Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 11/28/06 11:08 PM, UnusQuoMeridianus wrote:

At 11/28/06 11:03 PM, ironzealot wrote: The singular purpose of sexuality is reproduction

and pleasure/sexual gratification.

That pleasure exists to induce us to engage in the act of sex, I wouldn't say that was a purpose of sex.

At 11/28/06 07:57 PM, Begoner wrote:

I read what he posted, and it was disgusting trash. It was bigoted and irrational -- homosexuality is not an "affliction" of which somebody needs to be "cured." His whole argument was solely founded upon his homophobia and is completely invalid.

Because you stated that we should (sarcastically) cure blacks of their "affliction", but if you actually read his topic post, you'd realize that he talked about different races ect (and how they're not an affliction). Thank you.

At 11/28/06 07:54 PM, Kev-o wrote:

How old are you? Oh, and you left out the 'is'.

No, I literally meant "your stupid showing" meaning 'all' of you.

So Kev, your stupid showing =D

How did we go from gay people to torn vaginas?

At 11/28/06 11:08 PM, UnusQuoMeridianus wrote:

At 11/28/06 11:03 PM, ironzealot wrote: The singular purpose of sexuality is reproduction

and pleasure/sexual gratification.

No, sexual gratification is only an incentive, its not the purpose. If sex wasn't enjoyable then no creatures wouldn't mate and reproduce.

And on the opposite side of the spectrum; injuring yourself is painful, but the the pain itself isn't the reason we feel pain, it acts as a deterent to not injure yourself.

At 11/28/06 11:57 PM, Dash-Underscore-Dash wrote: How did we go from gay people to torn vaginas?

Vaginas are just fun to talk about. The world revolves around vagina.

At 11/29/06 12:05 AM, cellardoor6 wrote:

Vaginas are just fun to talk about. The world revolves around vagina.

And Penis... and Money...

We [being of normal sexual orientation] have sex because we have to. Not because it feels good, sure that may be the reason when you're 17 and with your girlfriend. But as a species, sexual pleasure is just a bonus. On the other hand, homosexuals have sex with the same sex strictly for pleasure, that's it. And homosexuality can be cured, just have to find out where the chemical imbalance is and correct it.

If only we could cure stupidity...

At 11/29/06 03:47 AM, Camarohusky wrote: If only we could cure stupidity...

We can, its called school.

I could see homosexuality as being a form of population control. Because quite frankly, we don't need every single person in the world reproducing in order to increase the human population. No one person needs to reproduce, so long as the species as a whole manages to reproduce in one way or another. We right now have 6 billion people on this planet, so why are we so concerned with whether a small part of the population is genetically inclined to mate in order to breed or not?

At 11/28/06 11:54 PM, Techware wrote: So Kev, your stupid showing =D

And, for some reason, you think "your" is short for "you are".

Homosexuality is sort of like nature's birth control. Even if you abort all fetuses characterised by a "gay gene", chances are you'll be wanting children anyway. In other words, aborting all gay fetuses would be pretty much destroying one of the only limits of population growth.

Not really a smart idea.

At 11/29/06 11:18 AM, Peter-II wrote:

And, for some reason, you think "your" is short for "you are".

You are stupid showing?

At 11/29/06 11:01 AM, qygibo wrote: I could see homosexuality as being a form of population control...

Mmm...
:-/

I don't see this being true because lots of gay people have children naturally if they don't adopt.

I myself was going to be a father a while back... so where's nature's population control in me?

At 11/28/06 11:08 PM, ironzealot wrote: phenotype are the observable physical characteristics derived from a combination of genetic and environmental influences, it has nothing to do with behavior

Phenotypes are observable characteristics that result from genetic and environmental influences. They aren't necessarily physical – a behavor resulting from certain genetics certainly is a phenotype. Arguing semantics (especially when you're wrong) does nothing to further your case, bud.

At 11/29/06 11:46 AM, fli wrote:

At 11/29/06 11:01 AM, qygibo wrote:

I myself was going to be a father a while back... so where's nature's population control in me?

You'll inject with the gay serum, thus making the world full of more of you and having Querr eye for the Straight Guy hit new levels of popularity.

At 11/29/06 03:37 PM, Grammer wrote:

At 11/28/06 03:31 PM, Begoner wrote: Then we can also cure blacks of their disorder while we're at it.

There have actually been gay people who are now attracted to women.

Then there not gay.

Why do people talk about gays as if they have a spreading disease. Fuck sake will people just leave gays alone.

At 11/29/06 03:42 PM, Mercator wrote:

At 11/28/06 07:13 PM, raggedclaws wrote:

Yes, it is an actual FACT that there is a higher gay PERCENTAGE of large population centers.

Link.

And there could be many reasosn for this.

Emmigration, or just the sheer numbers of people.

Gays tend to have larger cell clusters. We dunno why they are larger, we just know that they are larger.

Link.

At 11/29/06 03:42 PM, Mercator wrote:

Yes, it is an actual FACT that there is a higher gay PERCENTAGE of large population centers.

It's simple really, gays are subconsciously drawn to the cities because the stronger electromagnetic fields from more concentrated electrical usage increases their abillity the gay venom they use to vreate more of their kind. Once produced, they can create new gays by using it to spike drinks or infect water supplies. Though many times this will fail because the same interference can cause inaccurate readings on their gaydar, causing them to target the already gay.

No, we can't. Even if a gay was "cured", I wouldn't trust the fucker near our menfolk.

At 11/29/06 03:41 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

Then there not gay.

But they used to be?

At 11/29/06 04:44 PM, Techware wrote:

At 11/29/06 03:41 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

But they used to be?

You can't used to be.

Your either Straight, Gay, Bi(I guess) or a deeply confused person at the time.

At 11/29/06 04:57 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

You can't used to be.

That doesn't make sense.

At 11/29/06 12:05 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: No, sexual gratification is only an incentive, its not the purpose. If sex wasn't enjoyable then no creatures wouldn't mate and reproduce.

obviously but do you think animals think "alright i'm gonna mount this bitch so i can create little critters and further my species"? i doubt it, animals reproduce by instinct and because of what they get in return.
and for those who like to argue that humans are above animals and therefore sex is bad, etc, etc... shouldn't the fact that humans are one of the only creatures who have sex for pleasure and are able to do it with out producing offspring seperate us further from animals?

At 11/29/06 04:44 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: We can, its called school.

if only that were true.

At 11/29/06 04:57 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 11/29/06 04:44 PM, Techware wrote:

At 11/29/06 03:41 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

But they used to be?

You can't used to be.

Your either Straight, Gay, Bi(I guess) or a deeply confused person at the time.

I think that's a lot of your own personal opinion and definition of sexuality.

Someone could be covering up their sexual preference.. Someone might prefer both sexes.. I don't see why someone might not change preferences over the years. Why is this not possible in your eyes?

Say I enjoy sleeping with women today. Ten years from now, I begin enjoying men. You're saying this can't happen?

At 11/29/06 05:32 PM, Techware wrote:

At 11/29/06 04:57 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

That doesn't make sense.

If your gay, your gay.

You can't used to be gay.

Your either gay or you never were.

At 11/29/06 03:44 PM, cold-as-hell wrote: Why do people talk about gays as if they have a spreading disease. Fuck sake will people just leave gays alone.

Yeah, if homosextuallity is a desease, I should call in sick from school.

But seriously, this whole idea sounds like ethnic clensing to me, not a "cure". Being able to choose whether or not your baby is gay is like choosing whether or not you want it to be a girl or whether or not you want it to be black.

And it doesn't make sense in the first place.

To stop a baby from having a certain gene, you would have to kill that gene in the mother and the father before you even made the baby in the first place.

Do you people understand the serious side effects and mental dissorders that could accure whith this kind of chemical change?

Use common sense, people.

At 11/29/06 05:59 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:

Do you people understand the serious side effects and mental dissorders that could accure whith this kind of chemical change?

Use common sense, people.

If we had the technology to target specfic genes, then that wouldn't be a problem.

I think it's all a matter of choice to be homosexual or not. However, it is often a very fundamental choice that defines one's character as are most choices of the sexual nature. Thus, once one entertains the notion of being homosexual, it is hard for he/she to deviate from this sexual deviance, and they become mentally programmed to this gayness as if it were integral to their identity.
It's bad that people say others are "coming out of the closet" as if the closet were some sort of fixed establishment that can't be destroyed. In a sense, when you seriously call someone gay (i.e. not jokingly or as an insult) who had no notion of being gay before, then you're sort of pushing him/her to that position. You're putting words in their mouth. And you're unfortunately helping that person depart from the natural model of behavior.
Sure, you might say that animals do it and people in ancient times did it. But that doesn't make it right. I should also add that I hope we're not animals; there are only some times that we are forced to revert to our primitive ways, but I think that we should aim to minimize the number of times we have to do that.
I don't think there are any gay genes or anything like that, but you are justified in thinking that one's gayness is almost programmed into a gay person since it's all mental. And please consider that scientific pseudo-studies are just phony; they're biased and often presuppose their conclusion without credible data or acceptable statistical methods.
Anyway, I think you can cure gay people by un-programming them from homosexuality and re-programming them to heterosexuality through psychological enforcement. Of course, it's often close to impossible when they're already gay, so that's too bad. But I think it was in some movie like the Manchurian Candidate where some guy was brainwashed into being an agent for his previous national enemy; I hope you see the concept applies in this situation as well.
Well, whatever, I don't really care. I just think gayness erodes societal quality. Life's no longer fabulous.

At 11/29/06 06:03 PM, Dash-Underscore-Dash wrote: If we had the technology to target specfic genes, then that wouldn't be a problem.

And how would you do that?

By distroying the gene. Therefore, the child (and parent) would have NO sextuallity. This is a hell of a lot less socially acceptable than being gay.

And that's without side effects...