Worst Member

[Octo]

Evolution would eventually weed out homosexuality because those genes which created it or allowed for it, would not be passed on.

Because its impossible for a straight person to have a gay baby...waitaminit what?! If what you're saying is right (its not by the way) then alls you gotta do is wait it out for a couple of eons, no more gay pride marches!

If homosexuality is completely normal, I suggest we all start practicing it and see how long our race survives. I know that some of you will undoubtedly get emotional by what I have said, since you have had years of media brainwashing, but when you analyse what I have just said, you will know that it is true. So stop jumping up and down.

*Bounce Bounce Bounce*

I'm up for that experiment, I still have unresolved issues from high school...

Yeah but it doesnt matter because not everybody is gay or going to go gay. Plus theres like loads of people (over 9000) still having babies. So the human race is in no danger. Except from Nuclear bombs and stuff like that. And anyway what about humans is 'normal' anymore? Are we meant to behave like animals (naturally)? Just start getting pregnant at age 14 and shitting out kids all over the place? (oh wait we already have!)

Gay pride is only a reaction to gay persecution. One day everyone will just stop giving a shit about peoples sexuality and we can be happy shiny people holding hands. Provided we haven't been blown up.

Also, I'm still not going to vote for you

 

[DLPB]

(its not by the way)
-----------

Naturally it is. Therefore through evolution the gene(s) would naturally die out and so would homosexuality. (on the whole. I am well aware that there are bisexual people about or gays that have sex with women etc etc).

But eventually the trait would die out (or at the least be much less prevalent), would take a looooong time. Anyway the point I was making was that I do not like it being forced on me in silly parades and I don't like it being declared normal. It certainly isn't. It is as normal as being born with 11 fingers. It doesn't matter how much the media tries to make it acceptable, no straight man is ever gonna look at 2 gays kissing and think "awwww isn't that sweet".

Also, I do wonder if it will eventually just go away, because we still have people harping on about the slave trade and 100 other things decades ago.

 

[Joker]

Tbh, I only voted for DR because he had so few votes at the time, and Username had so many.

I wonder if I can switch my vote now...Mako IS pretty shit.

 

[Mitch Connor]

Homosexuality does occur in nature. Now, that doesn't mean that homosexual animals are ideal for the species, but it does occur in nature, and the fact that it still persists means its not being weeded out, (or of course that its not genetic)

And nothing is being forced on you and gay people are gonna parade around as much as they want. Who cares, Its nobodies business if they want to walk down the streets of San Francisco half naked. I dont live there, so i'm good.

 

[Joe]

Go vote me Best DR and I'll vote you worst.

[/politics]

 

[DLPB]

11 fingers on 2 hands also appears in nature. Something which becomes normal and a positive trait, come about because they are an advantage to the individual or the species. Homosexuality has NO positive traits to a species, it is the opposite. Homosexuals would generally not pass on their genes and thus the error is corrected.

 

[Mitch Connor]

I dunno, I for one doubt its even genetic, because if it were why wouldn't it have already been weeded out.

 

[Octo]

Exactly. So Bumfun is something you're just going to have to put up with. Like man nipples....they haven't gone yet either!

Its all totally fine.

 

[Alessa Gillespie]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

bluh bluh

 

[Octo]

^thanks for that. I put 'animal homosexuality' into google images by mistake and now my soul hurts.

 

[ForceStealer]

BUT YOU DON'T SEE THEM GOING ON PRIDE MARCHES DO YOU?!

 

[DLPB]

Thankfully.

 

[Ryushikaze]

11 fingers on 2 hands also appears in nature. Something which becomes normal and a positive trait, come about because they are an advantage to the individual or the species. Homosexuality has NO positive traits to a species, it is the opposite. Homosexuals would generally not pass on their genes and thus the error is corrected.

Homosexuality can have beneficial traits to the species. But the thing is, a thing doesn't have to be beneficial to be passed on. Merely non detrimental. And gay people can and do reproduce sexually. Ted Haggard for one.

I dunno, I for one doubt its even genetic, because if it were why wouldn't it have already been weeded out.

Not if it does not impede species fitness overall. Most bees, for example, do not reproduce, period, and thus homosexuality and assexuality are not always negatives towards reproductive fitness of the species.
There have actually been hypotheses floated that, noting the trend that the more male children a woman has, the more likely subsequent ones are to be gay, that homosexuality has a species fitness purpose of preventing, in part, overbreeding.

BUT YOU DON'T SEE THEM GOING ON PRIDE MARCHES DO YOU?!

Sometimes you do

 

[DLPB]

Merely non detrimental.
-------

You think having 2 people who cannot reproduce is not detrimental to a species? You seem to be under the illusion once again that this argument is opinion based. Don't kid yourself, it isn't

I made the point that homosexual genes may well be passed on if an homosexual has sex with the opposite gender, but that does not change anything. It doesn't change the fact that homosexuality is detrimental, it doesn't change the fact that it isn't "normal" and it doesn't change the fact that it would be in a severe minority if evolution was allowed to take its course naturally for a very long period of time.

The fact that is is there concludes that it occurred and that it was able to escape millions of years of evolution but it is a severe minority for a reason.

If everybody practiced it we would go extinct. There is nothing more detrimental than that. FACT.

 

[Octo]

If everybody practiced it we would go extinct. There is nothing more detrimental than that. FACT.

All right fine. If you don't want to do it we won't do it ok? Jesus!

 

[Mitch Connor]

You think having 2 people who cannot reproduce is not detrimental to a species?

No not really, they just get weeded out, and the rest of the species goes on.

You seem to be under the illusion once again that this argument is opinion based. Don't kid yourself, it isn't

You seem to be under the illusion that everything that comes out of your mouth is a fact. homosexuality is not detrimental to any species because the many species in which it occurs in naturally are still around and not going anywhere anytime soon. (at least not because of homosexuality)

If everybody practiced it we would go extinct. There is nothing more detrimental than that. FACT.

Thats great....too bad that's never, ever been the case and never will be.

BTW, Im glad were doing this in this thread, as now everyone who comes to vote in this thread can see clearly why you really are the best member this place has to offer (And by best I mean worse)

I'm rootin for you!

 

[Joker]

^thanks for that. I put 'animal homosexuality' into google images by mistake and now my soul hurts.

See folks, it's posts like these that earn those "best noob" votes.

VOTE OCTO 2010

AND HELP MAKE A BRIGHTER FUTURE TODAY

btw I totally thanked that post...then I unthanked it so I could thank it again because lulz

 

[Octo]

Aw shucks! I'm just happy to be nominated. Which probably means my life is seriously lacking right now @_@

 

[Ryushikaze]

Merely non detrimental.
-------

You think having 2 people who cannot reproduce is not detrimental to a species? You seem to be under the illusion once again that this argument is opinion based. Don't kid yourself, it isn't

Yes. Portions of populations not reproducing is beneficial to a species as it prevents overbreeding and thus overconsumption of resources. Population statistics aren't solely about 'more more more.'

I made the point that homosexual genes may well be passed on if an homosexual has sex with the opposite gender, but that does not change anything. It doesn't change the fact that homosexuality is detrimental, it doesn't change the fact that it isn't "normal" and it doesn't change the fact that it would be in a severe minority if evolution was allowed to take its course naturally for a very long period of time.

It does not detriment the species it is found in. It is normal, it occurs naturally in nature, in the wild. And it IS a minority. But it still crops up. This is despite most species where it crops up in not engaging in the human practice of homosexuals engaging in reproductive sex for the sake of appearance.

The fact that is is there concludes that it occurred and that it was able to escape millions of years of evolution but it is a severe minority for a reason.

Yes. It's a niche evolutionary adaptation. In humanity, it appears more often than in other species.

If everybody practiced it we would go extinct. There is nothing more detrimental than that. FACT.

But this is a strawman. If an entire species was predated, they'd go extinct too, but parts of a population being predated and being removed from the resource drain IS beneficial to the whole of the species.

 

[looneymoon]

I voted Octo

YOU GOT FANS OCTO.

 

[Joker]

First lesbro

now octobro

 

[DLPB]

Ahh shaddap. Watch this instead, it's better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6x7BeXYiZc&feature=related

 

[Joker]

Tbh

This means DR does not approve of lesbians.

I therefore strip him of his Man Card and ask that he send his balls to Man Headquarters for reassignment.

 

[Ryushikaze]

Ahh shaddap. Watch this instead, it's better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6x7BeXYiZc&feature=related

Your concession is wholeheartedly accepted.

 

[DLPB]

No concessions on my part, I have said what I wanted to, and Dinosaurs is still better.