How can homosexuality not be a perversion?

What people do behind closed doors is nobody's business. (BJ's are perverted to some people, but not you, I'll bet!).

 

Wait...”hell” is a swear word to you? Explains a lot.

 

Vulnerable to the homosexual message? ****! LOL! The only people "vulnerable" to the homosexual message are probably in need of the public service message.

 

By the way....what is this “homosexual message” you refer to?

 

Of course, it is. Don't you know this? I think you wrote "bloody hell," which is even stronger.

Bloody, as an adverb, is a commonly used expletive attributive (intensifier) in British English, Australian English, and a number of other Commonwealth nations. Bloody is considered profanity, citing its origin from the phrase "of generational" or "of family".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki


That said, none of George Carlin's words that could not at one time be said on television are considered swear words to young people (even the "f" word is thrown around casually these days.)

 

Well you know what they say about those overly obsessed gay 'shamers'. Latent and all that.

 

You really are emotional with that rant.
I get why you want to harp on my supposed swearing, because you have no other argument. Christ (oops is that a swear?) I’ve been propping you up for ten rounds just toying with you. It’s been bloody fun mate.

 

Your argument, which superstitiously presumes some kind of supernaturally-prescribed "purpose" for morphology (refuted by basic evolutionary observation), equally applies to the mouth. Which you once again fail to address. Your opposition to the anus was that it was part of the digestive track . . . so is the mouth. How are you unaware of this? Rather, how can you pretend to be unaware of this? You really expect us all to believe that you never learned that the mouth is part of the digestive track? I'm sorry. No one is falling for that nonsense.

Oh, and both possums and skunks are serviceable as food, as our ancestors learned. You think otherwise because agriculture has provided you with other options that you've grown used to. Another terrible, terrible analogy that you will fail to defend in any rational way.

 

How can homophobia not be a perversion?

 

Lol...And I should be free to ridicule people who can't grasp the difference between consensual sex and non-consensual sex.
But I guess that if you worship trump, you had to throw that notion under the bus years ago.

 

Lol...How can fellatio and cunnilingus not be perversions?
That sort of puts a crimp in gay bashing.

 

duplicate

 

It’s not? So everyone, gays and heteros, who have anal SEX, aren’t actually having sex?
Sorry to break it to you but sexual intercourse involves penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth.

 

What you call "homophobia" is just a natural aversion to homosexuality, which occurs in about 90% of the population. Do you believe 90% of the population is "homophobic"?

 

Do you have factual data backing up your claim 90% of the population has an aversion to homosexuality? And could you specify which population you’re referring to? Meaning US population? World population? Population of tribes of Papua New Guinea?

 

I don't think homosexuality is any more or less a perversion than oral sex, masturbation or birth control.

I would hope that responsible, successful, peaceful homosexuals reproduce via artificial ensimination/surrogate mothers, so they can carry on their positive attributes to future generations along with responsible, successful, peaceful heterosexuals.

As I would hope that irresponsible, violent failures of all sexual persuasions limit their sexual conduct to 'perversions' that dont continue their failing to future generations.

 

This study suggests that only 4.5% of the US population identifies as LGBT, so maybe I should move my 90% figure up to 95.5% of the population having an aversion to homosexuality:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-adults-identify-as-lgbt-study-idUSKCN1QM2L6

Do you believe 95.5% of the US population is "homophobic"?

 

Well nature made it fun so we would do it alot to maintain the species. It is still our prime directive and homosexuality is a perversion of that. Hey to each his own but the laws of nature are what they are.

 

Why? Why is someone for their own happiness by PURPOSELY denying a mother or a father in their life a good thing especially for the child? The child should always come first.

 

You said

I asked
Who is stopping him from doing so ON HIS OWN TIME AND HIS OWN DIME? He free speech applies to his own time and own dime when he is working for team owner in the NFL representing that team before the paying public he we conduct his behavior as his employer tells him and that means no political or any other personal protest then no protest. If he can't abide by that then go seek other employment he has no right to that job.

 

Because a gay couple is better than a single parent. I agree that a mother and a father provide the optimal atmosphere for child developement. But plenty of children develope adequately (by becoming responsible, productive, peaceful, happy people) even in single parent households. Theres no reason a same sex couple would be more of an impediment. Infact, alot of the difficulty in the single parent household is financial and time constraints, which asame sex couple can overcome as easily as a straight couple.

Given that many straight couples fail to adequately develope their children in spite of having the optimal arrangement to do so, I would welcome any gay couples picking up the slack and carrying on whatever it is that aided them in doing so to future generations.

 

No that actually doesn’t mean 95.5% have an aversion to homosexuality. It just means 95.5% aren’t homosexual. Not everyone who is hetero has a strong dislike (aversion) to homosexuality.
No, I do not believe 95.5% of the US is homophobic.

 

My prime directive is great sex.

 

That's what nature intended and with a person of the opposite sex.

 

And yet same sex couples can also enjoy great sex