Why Is It Wrong To Be Gay In Singapore??
-
I'm not against gays.
I'm don't quite like bisexuals, though.
I mean why must choose so many options?
Can't attribute yourself to which gender?
Identity crisis?
Enlighten me. -
Really thank you for asking me to seach the term animal homosexuality on google. I did, and the first website that appears is this
Yes, in fact i've read it. The organisation's aim seems to be "helping" gays to *change* to be "socially acceptable". That means it probably has some bias against homosexuality.
http://www.narth.com/docs/animalmyth.html
Hmmm Now I know the reasoning and the myth of animal homosexuality. How about you read about it!
Most animals don't have sex for fun idiot. Unlike human who have pretty much a bunch of sickos. Their main purpose is for mating and reproduce...
# It is poor science to "read" human motivations and sentiments into animal behavior
well, this basically means humans cannot "read" the minds of animals, so we will not be able to tell if they are having gay sex becoz they are "confused" LMAO
or saying "Hi" 
or really "just becoz they want to". Ok granted, it is TRUE that we cannot tell for SURE the reason why they have gay sex, so the question can now be broken into 2 parts:
1. Homosexual mentality - we wouldn't know how animals think, so its a big ? are they really thinking gay?
2. Homosexual activity - no doubt about animal gay activities.
so before any Ace Ventura or Doctor Dolittle stands out from the crowd to do translations, i guess we'd never know how animals really think. Meanwhile we know gay activities is not restricted only to mankind. Agree?
# Irrational animal behavior is not a yardstick to determine what is morally acceptable behavior for rational man.
Very true. What makes man different from animals is our intellectual ability. So what should be the morally acceptable behavior? Should we allow adults to chose their own preferences and likes? Or should we use law to force them into submission to do what the majority EXPECTs from them?
** Did u look further in your google search? I think u didn't. Or did you do selective reading?
I'd give u a link to read up...
http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1999/03/cov_15featurea3.htmlSuccessful life forms are characterized by diversity, so changing environments don't wipe them out. That diversity often extends to sexuality. Thus bisexuality and homosexuality are characteristics not of twisted nature, but of generous nature.
this is a funny but interesting way to look at itSo what if animals are gay? Are people vindicated in our diverse sex lives by diversity in animals? If they put us on trial, can we bring as character witnesses lions who make the Sign of the Great Tawny Beast with same-sex lions? (And they do. Unless that's just a greeting.) No, not unless we would bring those same lions to testify that killing your new significant other's children is a useful way to free up their time for you and your future children. Animals do all kinds of things that we frown on for ourselves.
In the end, the question seems NOT to be whether gay activities is distinct in humans, but rather if society wants to open up and accept them for who they are, and give them the respect they deserve.
But we can bring the lions to testify that there's nothing unnatural about human sex lives, that bisexuality and homosexuality are not among those twisted human inventions, like income tax, or graduate school, or step aerobics, that have no close analog in the wild. -
Like topic started said, pls don't bring religion in.Originally posted by banzie:About the flood.
Sciencist believed that its a global flood. Simply there a signs and etc. Plus test were made in regards to the issue. I shall not elaborate here. Whether there are survival in other parts of the world is another question since we only see thru the eyes of Noah. There are many ancient records of an major ancient flood too from other civilisation.
But just for the record (i juz cant stand it being un-answered), there was never a global flood.
Problems with a Global Flood FAQ
Flood Geology FAQ
ps. > so now u are saying Noah and family are not the only human survivors? -
I read further down. And a couple of website in google MOSTLY justifying against animal homosexuality. Frankly I strongly agree in it... Simply There are very few animals that is like Human actually enjoy sex. Sex in the animal kindom is purely an instinctive thingy.Originally posted by sgquitter:In the end, the question seems NOT to be whether gay activities is distinct in humans, but rather if society wants to open up and accept them for who they are, and give them the respect they deserve.
Frankly the above few quotes you put in doesn't justify your stand at all. You telling us that we could not understand how animals could have thought... There are characteristic which deems homosexuality... basically means action and habits... You mean to tell me gays are all in the game of the mind!? And it seems that you are switching from your previous stand on your last sentences...
Regards to the flood. You should read more and watch the discovery channel. Sciencetist had tested the assuming pre-flood global environment to determine if it works jsut as the bible said. And realised that plants does lived longer bigger and better. Everything coincides with the bible.
Regards to the ancient flood. Its in the myth of many forklore. And I'm not saying that noahs are NOT the ONLY Survival. I'm just said MAYBE please read properly...
I offer alot of points in all my previous post... It seems that you guys couldn't answer msot of them... selectively pick on the few... hmmm So I guess the rest of the people reading these should have a clear understanding of whether homosexuality is RIGHT or WRONG.
Furthermore I had never imprint any ideal that they do not have the RIGHTS to do it I'm just saying it is WRONG to be homosexual. -
Is this as far as your mathematic knowledge had gone!? Is this how you interpret statistics!? Are you capable for a more mature debate? Its like saying Monkeys have hair and you have hair. You must be a monkey?
Nah.. tat is someone problem of making the acumption tat lesser people = it abnormal. I think the example I provided shows strongly tat even though there r only 3% gays, it doesn't shows anythingThat is an interesting questions often by atheist. In Hebrews history Adam is said to have 30 over sons and daugther. Over a span of 800++ years. The exact solution I would say is a ? simply few questions had not being answered.
1) If god made more men and women other than adam, then why punish these people with death since they r totally innocent
1) Did God made more Man and Woman after adam and eve?
2) Human that survive over hundreds of years could be genetically mutated as compared to someone born the hundreds of years. Does this contributes to having incesteous relationship and hence causing genetic weak link in the on coming generations?
3) Incest was never listed as a sin in the bible... In fact the daughter of Lots had sex with their father that bore the Syrian people( If I had not forgotten), King David's Daughter was rape by her brother whose from another womb.
4) There is recordings of Angels (presumingly) the Fallen angels who saw that the human female are beautiful and hence had intercourse and created some funny looking babies. Maybe afterall its not the incest
2) Then perhaps human had genetically mutated so tat being gay is due to nature, aka god will
3) SO bible allow people to have incest ? Comparing incest and homo, incest is much worse.
4) Where do u read on these funny looking babies story ? Please provide the appropriate bible passageYou made a serious mistake about errm Christian doctrine... God made the earth and everything nessccery to form aids bacteria. it's the free will working of man and living things that caused all these. Just like God made uranium. Man made atomic bombs.
I expect tis answer SO god is not the only creator, men has also being promoted to creator of life themselves.Get it!? If everything God had processed then gays must be made by God and what is the point of making something to push them going to hell?
I don't know From adam to moses time aren't god making people and pushing them to hell ?About the flood.
Global ? U sure or not ? Is there even enough water in the world to cover the whole earth up till its tallest mountain ? I do not believe scientist believe theer is a global flood, but local flood. And u can see local flood regularly every year in some part of the world.
Sciencist believed that its a global flood. Simply there a signs and etc. Plus test were made in regards to the issue. I shall not elaborate here. Whether there are survival in other parts of the world is another question since we only see thru the eyes of Noah. There are many ancient records of an major ancient flood too from other civilisation. -
Please read before following up thanks... Do you really think there is not enough water to flood the whole earth? The formation of earth had believed that initially there is no land at all. Please read up and reply using facts than your assumption. As for your above statement I couldn't even bother to reply your own persumtion. Most of which are purely logical questions. Simply you still do not undersand much about the bible. Even if you do it's pretty superficial. How about reading up abit before discussing?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Global ? U sure or not ? Is there even enough water in the world to cover the whole earth up till its tallest mountain ? I do not believe scientist believe theer is a global flood, but local flood. And u can see local flood regularly every year in some part of the world. -
Please read before following up thanks... Do you really think there is not enough water to flood the whole earth? The formation of earth had believed that initially there is no land at all.
Yes i obviously think there is not enough water to flood the whole earth till there is no land and tat men r already living in tat land. Show me the evidence.Please read up and reply using facts than your assumption. As for your above statement I couldn't even bother to reply your own persumtion. Most of which are purely logical questions. Simply you still do not undersand much about the bible. Even if you do it's pretty superficial. How about reading up abit before discussing?
I don't think u can say tat I did not read about the bible. If I do not read how can I come out with such questions ? They r purly logical question, and is tat wrong ? U mean u cannot answer logical questions ? Isn't the question "god create adam and eve not steve" a part of your so called logical question itself ? -
Please read before following up thanks... Do you really think there is not enough water to flood the whole earth? The formation of earth had believed that initially there is no land at all.
Yes i obviously think there is not enough water to flood the whole earth till there is no land and tat men r already living in tat land. Show me the evidence.Please read up and reply using facts than your assumption. As for your above statement I couldn't even bother to reply your own persumtion. Most of which are purely logical questions. Simply you still do not undersand much about the bible. Even if you do it's pretty superficial. How about reading up abit before discussing?
I don't think u can say tat I did not read about the bible. If I do not read how can I come out with such questions ? They r purly logical question, and is tat wrong ? U mean u cannot answer logical questions ? Isn't the question "god create adam and eve not steve" a part of your so called logical question itself ?
Due to your superficial understanding of science and the word I shall give you alittle hint and you go and read around. Try google on the formation of earth and life. It is belived that the atmosphere composite is different what it is now. Therefore its very highly likely that water does flood the earth. Particularly in the earth stage of earth's formation. So as the evolutionist had believed that earth initially were all water. Further more. Most of the high mountains are coming our thru volcanic activities. Anyway go read around will ya?
Regards to your question on the bible which stated spiritual beings having intercourse with earthly woman and bore children are as follows.
Gen 6:1 ¶ And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
Gen 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown.
Gen 6:5 ¶ And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.
You will realised that it all is quite true. Simply biblical scholar believed they found the tomb of noah at mt ararat which Noah had park his ship. The tomb showed image of 8 figure of which the parents seems to be giants in propotion in size. (Which if you lived for 600 -1000years you'll be a giant too like the plants test scientist had made) Scientist believed that man, our biological structure could actually live for 600-1200 years. But you may ask why do we shorten our life to less than 130? Beside biblically God had commanded so, Biblical scholars believed that it has to do with the flood. The great flood had changed the atmospheric condition of the world. Like wise as you read further the generation as follows live shorter and shorter. Which like I said it explain why when scientist tested growth of Plants in a more perfect environment. Plants grow longer and bigger.
Now we had seriously deviate from the topic... Since you are so smart How about answering why do you think it's right to be a gay. -
Due to your superficial understanding of science and the word I shall give you alittle hint and you go and read around. Try google on the formation of earth and life. It is belived that the atmosphere composite is different what it is now. Therefore its very highly likely that water does flood the earth. Particularly in the earth stage of earth's formation. So as the evolutionist had believed that earth initially were all water. Further more. Most of the high mountains are coming our thru volcanic activities. Anyway go read around will ya?
Tat is interesting, please give the website which u have googled and claim tat the whole world is covered in water. Earlier someone had already pasted the website tat claim the flood is impossible. Where r your claims ? I posted something here for everyone to read instead of just claiming
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html#flood
Vapor canopy. This model, proposed by Whitcomb & Morris and others, proposes that much of the Flood water was suspended overhead until the 40 days of rain which caused the Flood. The following objections are covered in more detail by Brown.
How was the water suspended, and what caused it to fall all at once when it did?
If a canopy holding the equivalent to more than 40 feet of water were part of the atmosphere, it would raise the atmospheric pressure accordingly, raising oxygen and nitrogen levels to toxic levels.
If the canopy began as vapor, any water from it would be superheated. This scenario essentially starts with most of the Flood waters boiled off. Noah and company would be poached. If the water began as ice in orbit, the gravitational potential energy would likewise raise the temperature past boiling.
A canopy of any significant thickness would have blocked a great deal of light, lowering the temperature of the earth greatly before the Flood.
Any water above the ozone layer would not be shielded from ultraviolet light, and the light would break apart the water molecules.
Hydroplate. Walt Brown's model proposes that the Flood waters came from a layer of water about ten miles underground, which was released by a catastrophic rupture of the earth's crust, shot above the atmosphere, and fell as rain.
How was the water contained? Rock, at least the rock which makes up the earth's crust, doesn't float. The water would have been forced to the surface long before Noah's time, or Adam's time for that matter.
Even a mile deep, the earth is boiling hot, and thus the reservoir of water would be superheated. Further heat would be added by the energy of the water falling from above the atmosphere. As with the vapor canopy model, Noah would have been poached.
Where is the evidence? The escaping waters would have eroded the sides of the fissures, producing poorly sorted basaltic erosional deposits. These would be concentrated mainly near the fissures, but some would be shot thousands of miles along with the water. (Noah would have had to worry about falling rocks along with the rain.) Such deposits would be quite noticeable but have never been seen.
Comet. Kent Hovind proposed that the Flood water came from a comet which broke up and fell on the earth. Again, this has the problem of the heat from the gravitational potential energy. The water would be steam by the time it reached the surface of the earth.
Runaway subduction. John Baumgardner created the runaway subduction model, which proposes that the pre-Flood lithosphere (ocean floor), being denser than the underlying mantle, began sinking. The heat released in the process decreased the viscosity of the mantle, so the process accelerated catastrophically. All the original lithosphere became subducted; the rising magma which replaced it raised the ocean floor, causing sea levels to rise and boiling off enough of the ocean to cause 150 days of rain. When it cooled, the ocean floor lowered again, and the Flood waters receded. Sedimentary mountains such as the Sierras and Andes rose after the Flood by isostatic rebound. [Baumgardner, 1990a; Austin et al., 1994]
The main difficulty of this theory is that it admittedly doesn't work without miracles. [Baumgardner, 1990a, 1990b] The thermal diffusivity of the earth, for example, would have to increase 10,000 fold to get the subduction rates proposed [Matsumura, 1997], and miracles are also necessary to cool the new ocean floor and to raise sedimentary mountains in months rather than in the millions of years it would ordinarily take.
Baumgardner estimates a release of 1028 joules from the subduction process. This is more than enough to boil off all the oceans. In addition, Baumgardner postulates that the mantle was much hotter before the Flood (giving it greater viscosity); that heat would have to go somewhere, too.
Cenozoic sediments are post-Flood according to this model. Yet fossils from Cenozoic sediments alone show a 65-million-year record of evolution, including a great deal of the diversification of mammals and angiosperms. [Carroll, 1997, chpts. 5, 6, & 13]
Subduction on the scale Baumgardner proposes would have produced very much more vulcanism around plate boundaries than we see. [Matsumura, 1997]
New ocean basins. Most flood models (including those above, possibly excepting Hovind's) deal with the water after the flood by proposing that it became our present oceans. The earth's terrain, according to this model, was much, much flatter during the Flood, and through cataclysms, the mountains were pushed up and the ocean basins lowered. (Brown proposes that the cataclysms were caused by the crust sliding around on a cushion of water; Whitcomb & Morris don't give a cause.)
How could such a change be effected? To change the density and/or temperature of at least a quarter of the earth's crust fast enough to raise and lower the ocean floor in a matter of months would require mechanisms beyond any proposed in any of the flood models.
Why are most sediments on high ground? Most sediments are carried until the water slows down or stops. If the water stopped in the oceans, we should expect more sediments there. Baumgardner's own modeling shows that, during the Flood, currents would be faster over continents than over ocean basins [Baumgardner, 1994], so sediments should, on the whole, be removed from continents and deposited in ocean basins. Yet sediments on the ocean basin average 0.6 km thick, while on continents (including continental shelves), they average 2.6 km thick. [Poldervaart, 1955]
Where's the evidence? The water draining from the continents would have produced tremendous torrents. There is evidence of similar flooding in the Scablands of Washington state (from the draining of a lake after the breaking of an ice dam) and on the far western floor of the Mediterranean Sea (from the ocean breaking through the Straits of Gibralter). Why is such evidence not found worldwide?
How did the ark survive the process? Such a wholesale restructuring of the earth's topography, compressed into just a few months, would have produced tsunamis large enough to circle the earth. The aftershocks alone would have been devastating for years afterwards.Gen 6:1 ¶ And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
Tat again seems very strange. Then men r decendent of god and yet they still sin so much tat they get annihilated during noah ark time ?
Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
Gen 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown.
Gen 6:5 ¶ And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually. -
You will realised that it all is quite true. Simply biblical scholar believed they found the tomb of noah at mt ararat which Noah had park his ship. The tomb showed image of 8 figure of which the parents seems to be giants in propotion in size. (Which if you lived for 600 -1000years you'll be a giant too like the plants test scientist had made) Scientist believed that man, our biological structure could actually live for 600-1200 years. But you may ask why do we shorten our life to less than 130? Beside biblically God had commanded so, Biblical scholars believed that it has to do with the flood. The great flood had changed the atmospheric condition of the world. Like wise as you read further the generation as follows live shorter and shorter. Which like I said it explain why when scientist tested growth of Plants in a more perfect environment. Plants grow longer and bigger.
Tat is again one of the funniest story i have ever heard again. Show me the website where they found tis giant at mt arafat. Is it a christian website Anyway if a giant men was found, I am pretty sure teh whole world will get to know about it. How come nobody heard of tis ? Show me the website. Don't just keep claiming and claiming. -
u all believe everything u read arh? quoting websites doesn't make someone right u know
-
Frankly the above few quotes you put in doesn't justify your stand at all. You telling us that we could not understand how animals could have thought... There are characteristic which deems homosexuality... basically means action and habits... You mean to tell me gays are all in the game of the mind!? And it seems that you are switching from your previous stand on your last sentences...
Nah, not switching my stand. But found that it is quite pointless to argue based on animal's behaviour becoz:
1. the website u mentioned, it argues on the fact that we can only confirm the gay sex behaviors and stressing that humans can only see their actions but not understand the mentality behind those actions.
I agree with them. However:
Bonobo female + female sex - are u fine wif that?
Giraffe male + male sex - are u fine wif that?
Change the animal names to "human". Suddenly, many people turns upset. Why? It may not be your choice, but why would it bother u what others want?
Like what the quoted text in my previous post, such behaviour is not invented by humans.
2. As for the other point which says that rational humans should not follow irrational animals, i.e. we should have our own set of moral, cultural etc etc values to follow. Of coz i have to agree too. In the end, who cares how animals behave in various situations? We humans have our own way of doing things.
So is it so difficult to be tolerant of people with different preferences?Furthermore I had never imprint any ideal that they do not have the RIGHTS to do it I'm just saying it is WRONG to be homosexual.
So i guess our focus is very different.
I focus on the freedom of choice.
Today they tell u who to love and who not to. What happens tomorrow? -
u all believe everything u read arh? quoting websites doesn't make someone right u know
True, u have to understand and see if it make sense or not. In tis case the arguments make sense and I believe in it. If u can refute the arguments well then I will believe in your theory. Can u refute it ? It is certainly more right than not reading and just claiming. -
Since when was AIDS caused by bacteria. It is a monkey VIRUS that destroys the immune system.