-->
@AmericanPatriot
Just say "No" when someone asks :pYou definitely chose to have gay sex. I have no idea how you don't.
(Yes I know what you meant, no need to correct)
Did homosexuals choose to be homosexuals? Did map choose to be map?
Posts
Total:
77
(Yes I know what you meant, no need to correct)
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
One can choose to offload one's dick into any orifice.
Or be offloaded into.
I think that people have been making these choices for years.
Yet we still get hung up about it.
-->
@zedvictor4
I'm firmly convinced the hang ups are natural. Culture is stronger than instinct, but until we know a lot more than we do now disgust will always be something that needs to be controlled by self-discipline. It helps when people don't have parades in thongs or try to inform prepubescent children about all the different combinations of orifices and objects that might go in them. That kind of thing gives an excuse to justify the disgust.
-->
@FLRW
I am just pointing out God's poor design. We don't hear from him anymore because he lost his God license.
What does being intersex mean in my body?
Being intersex can present in about 40 different ways. The most common intersex traits include:....
...How common is being intersex?
An estimated 1 in 100 Americans is intersex. Around 2% of people worldwide have intersex traits.
An estimated 1 in 100 Americans is intersex. Around 2% of people worldwide have intersex traits.
"....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
..."Any variation from these typical numbers is referred to scientifically as an “aneuploidy.” If there is one additional X or Y, it is known as a “trisomy” (“tri” denoting the number 3). Genetic conditions that reflect a trisomy include:
Trisomies are the most common X and Y aneuploid conditions. Less common are “tetrasomies,” which denote the presence of four sex chromosomes:
Still rarer are the “pentasomies,” indicating five sex chromosomes:
.....Typically, 48- and 49-chromosome variations produce more pronounced symptoms than trisomies, although this is not always the case.
At the other end of the spectrum lie the “monosomies,” meaning a person born with only one sex chromosome. The only survivable monosomy SCA is 45,X. This is a female with only one X chromosome, a condition known as “Turner syndrome.”
...A fetus with only one Y chromosome and no X chromosome is not viable and cannot survive."....
-->
@ebuc
People who are intersex have genitals, chromosomes or reproductive organs that don't fit into a male/female sex binary. Isn't that poor design?
Sexual desire is created in the brain to impel reproduction. When neutral pathways are malformed it can create a desire for the same sex.
Poor Design
-->
@FLRW
Poor Design
All of Universe is tainted { asymmetrical }, i.e. not perfect { symmetry }.
There exist no perfect circles, squares, cubes or spheres, except in our Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego/i.
There exist no perfect circles, squares, cubes or spheres, except in our Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego/i.
Generalised adaptability via Meta-space mind, incorporates thinking outside the box, and not outside finite set of physical laws and cosmic principles.
Within that finite set, there is immense amount of complexity allowed. Some of that complexity is error and error can accumulate to some degree, however, to be clear,
1} ..A fetus with only one Y chromosome and no X chromosome is not viable and cannot survive."....,
2} there is no mamilian existence without an X chromsome.
Free will at its best is limited, and free will choice is a great illusion, as all is cause and effect determinism, at ultra-micro scales of existence of Gravity and Dark Energy, of which our physical reality is a resultant. Or so my rather simple-minded explorations of pattern shows me.
Free will at its best is limited, and free will choice is a great illusion, as all is cause and effect determinism, at ultra-micro scales of existence of Gravity and Dark Energy, of which our physical reality is a resultant. Or so my rather simple-minded explorations of pattern shows me.
So yes, we have the a really good illusion { appearence } of choice. So we must go with that, until we can isolate out the graviton-darkEon' s existence, and track all of their inter-relationships with each other and our physical reality. Ain't never going to happen.
-->
@ebuc
All of Universe is tainted
Yes, POOR DESIGN
-->
@FLRW
Yes, POOR DESIGN
Nope. Your confusing poor design with tainted, off-balance i.e. not pure equanimity.
1}There is no occupied space integrity with pure symmetry. Ex the neutron is is balanced charges, however, charges of positive and negative quarks.
2} a single y chromosome does not exist because that would be poor design,
2} a single y chromosome does not exist because that would be poor design,
3} females with a single X chromosome do exist and again, not perfect and has issues, because not X x
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
01} ..." Something similar is going on with neutrinos. Yes, they have masses, we believe. But not only that, when a neutrino is in a mass eigenstate, it does not have a well-defined flavor; and when it is in a flavor eigenstate, it does not have a well-defined mass.....
............First, there is no point assigning a mass to, e.g., the electron neutrino; when the neutrino is in a definite flavor eigenstate, its mass is indeterminate. Second, the actual neutrino masses and flavor mixing are defined by a 3x3 matrix. It even has a name: It is the PMNS (Pontecorvo-Maki-Nakagawa-Sataka) matrix, named after the physicists who developed this concept. It has four independent components (the rest are determined by various symmetries of this matrix), three of which are called “mixing angles” and the remaining is a phase.
........Essentially, this matrix determines how the various neutrino masses relate to each other and how the various neutrino flavors “mix” in neutrino oscillations; the actual masses of the neutrinos are still subject to yet another number, an overall common factor. Anyhow, here is our best knowledge of neutrino masses to date, in the form of experimentally fitted values of this neutrino mixing matrix:......
-->
@ebuc
The poor design is using a billion billion billion (10^27) atoms to create a human.
-->
@FLRW
The poor design is using a billion billion billion (10^27) atoms to create a human.
Woman is most complex creature of Universe, barring ideas of two or more women, or man and woman, and perhaps also black holes.
Complex does not = poor design.
Viruses { RNA or DNA, never both } = most simple design of that which will reproduce itself once inside the more complex biologic cell { RNA and DNA }.
Tainted = not purely symmetrical ergo asymmetrical off-balance irrespective of how small a degree.
Perfect equanimity does not exist, except as we always have Gravitational attraction/contraction balanced with Dark Energy expansion/repulsion.
Perfect equanimity does not exist, except as we always have Gravitational attraction/contraction balanced with Dark Energy expansion/repulsion.
EMRadition is balanced with magenetic and electric, yet pure plasma of electrons exists.
Yes pure elements do exist as in graphite, lead and Fuller-enes, however, they are composed of charged particles, positive and negative.
Off balance = off-center. Most particles have a known time that they will decay { half-life } does that make them a 'poor design '?
Off balance = off-center. Most particles have a known time that they will decay { half-life } does that make them a 'poor design '?
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
For sure.
In so much as everything that occurs within a Universe at any given moment, is natural.
Therefore everything that you refer to above is natural.
274 days later
-->
@FLRW
You know that God created homosexuals due to his poor design, don't you?
Evidence?
-->
@Best.Korea
Attraction doesnt seem like a choice. I mean, if it was a choice, person could change it any time a person chooses. However, it just seems impossible to change an attraction by choice.
Yah, I can agree with that. Up to a point. It isn't necessarily about attraction, though. It could be about necessity or power, for example.
Homosexual man could try not to look at men. However, he would still have imagination, because he would not be able to forget how men look like.
What about pedophilia or beastiality? I personally am a homosexual male who abandoned my sexual practices after becoming a Bible believer. I'm still gay, still have that attraction, I have just decided not to act on it.
Acting on an attraction is a choice, of course. Therefore, when homosexual man chooses to act on his attraction, that is choice.
Yes.
Lets think of this in a different way. God could have made me a homosexual. If He did, I would not be able to change it. I cannot change attraction by simply wishing it to change.
Correct.
Excuse me. Let me play with this spacing. I read something about it here in the instructions, but I'm not sure what was meant. Single space here.
Now, Bible tells us not to judge, not to seek revenge and to love everyone. That is what The New Testament is about.
Hmm. Firstly, the term Old and New Testament is a misnomer based upon a mistranslation. That's pedantic of me, but true. So, I may use the terms loosly for common distinction. Having said that, the Bible is often sort of misreperesented by theology. So, the sort of expectations that may arise from your above oversimplification may or may not be entirely accurate from a Biblical perspective. We are to judge and hate the wicked, but that doesn't mean taking an adversarial position. To "seek revenge" for example. A lot of that is ideological more than anything.
That doesnt mean that we cannot tell homosexuals who engage in homosexual acts that what they are doing is wrong and that God will punish them for it.Attraction is not a choice. Action is.
Well, hmmm. Not really. What we can tell them is that God finds homosexuality abhorent, unatural, and that practicing the act is the same as any other sexual deviation. Now, at the same time we are not appointed moral police of the world outside the congregation. To give you some idea, when becoming a believer I had the choice, and for a long time I chose the homosexual lifestyle. Knowing that that was an abominible practice to God and that I would suffer the consequence. Everlasting destruction. I eventually decided to choose to end the practice.
-->
@RaymondSheen
I personally am a homosexual male who abandoned my sexual practices after becoming a Bible believer
Aww so you no longer do butt stuff?
-->
@Best.Korea
Aww so you no longer do butt stuff?
I no longer do any stuff. That's why I'm so grouchy. Anyway, you'd have to be more specific about butt stuff. I still have complete normal butt activity of a non-sexual nature, the usual removal of bodily wastse. But I guess that goes without saying. Reminds me of an old Monty Python scketch which I can put a personal spin on for your specific tastses. A joke: Ahem. Have you heard about this, have you seen this? Apparently Hitler had an asshole transplant? The asshole rejected him.
Thank you very much ladies and gents, you've been wonderful . . .
-->
@RaymondSheen
A.I.A.I.
Alternatively Intelligent Artificial Insemination.
So,
Playtime.
No justification necessary.
As if.
Average male, 8700 ejaculations, 14 gallons of juice.
Will out.
-->
@zedvictor4
Uh . . . sorry?
-->
@RaymondSheen
Sorry.
A bit too satirical for you perhaps.
So, the basis of "sexuality" is procreational drive.
How one recreationally satisfies their procreational drive is largely irrelevant as far as I am concerned.
Who someone might cohabit with, or the colour of their wallpaper, or their chosen breed of dog is simply relative to trend rather than to sexual satisfaction per se.
In my opinion.
I just thought that the stats were interesting.
An average blokes procreational drive demands that over their lifetime, they ejaculate 8700 times and produce 14 gallons of ejaculate.
The fulfilment of inbuilt instructions that we have no conscious control over.
Makes one wonder.
-->
@zedvictor4
A bit too satirical for you perhaps.
Well, no, I got that, but didn't quite get the context.
So, the basis of "sexuality" is procreational drive.
That really doesn't explain various sexual deviations that aren't geared towards procreation. Masturbation, homosexuality, beastiality.
Who someone might cohabit with, or the colour of their wallpaper, or their chosen breed of dog is simply relative to trend rather than to sexual satisfaction per se.In my opinion.
Mine as well. From the Biblical perspective God created sex to be enjoyable but also with the primary purpose of procreation. It's like anything else, really, eating and food for example. Its purpose and pleasure obvious, as its potential for abuse or neglect.
-->
@RaymondSheen
"Sexual deviations".
I would suggest that procreational drive explains all deviations.
I currently prefer to run with the idea of evolved systems and processes.
Rather than a click of the Magician's fingers.
Endocrinal systems I suppose.
Inherent, independent chemical data systems.
Quite profound really.
-->
@zedvictor4
I would suggest that procreational drive explains all deviations.
Tru-dat !
-->
@Best.Korea
Now, Bible tells us not to judge, not to seek revenge and to love everyone. That is what The New Testament is about.
Well, God is dead in American Society; and quite frankly; in western society too.
The West's religion is not Christianity; it is westernism, and westernism calls for outlawing pedophillia. It is not in the westernist religion to be all loving.
Here is the west's moral code: Anything the west does is good; anything not done by the west and also done by the 3rd world is bad.
The world is becoming more western because the west is the most successful region on this planet.
Western society wants to have all of their laws be western while also denying being racist.
-->
@zedvictor4
"Sexual deviations".I would suggest that procreational drive explains all deviations.I currently prefer to run with the idea of evolved systems and processes.
Could you eloborate on that? I'm trying to imagine where you might be coming from and I got nothing. I can't imagine.
Rather than a click of the Magician's fingers.
C'mon. That would be like me sayiing of evolution that a monkey's tail broke off and it became human. It's a straw man.
-->
@RaymondSheen
The monkey became human, or the tail became human?
Nonetheless that would be magic too.
A theory suggests that species evolution is an extended process.
I think that the second bit of the first bit, is self explanatory
You addressed it with a monkey's tail/tale.
Nonetheless:
Re the first bit of the first bit.
Ejaculate,
Job done for now,
Then roll over and sleep.
Jizz extraction and absorption methodology may vary.
Here's something that struck me.
Why a P rather than a B in absorption?
-->
@RaymondSheen
So, the basis of "sexuality" is procreational drive.That really doesn't explain various sexual deviations that aren't geared towards procreation. Masturbation, homosexuality, beastiality.
...
Could you eloborate on that? I'm trying to imagine where you might be coming from and I got nothing. I can't imagine.
Many people have a shallow understanding of natural selection + random mutation and can only imagine perfectly rational design. The reality is that the changes which are preserved would be any that make the slightest net improvement in fitness (which is average multi-generational genetic reproductive success).
There are underlying systems and those systems are not susceptible to be changed just as easily to one way vs another. There are a finite number of "directions" which small changes can affect without catastrophe.
So suppose there is a sequence of basepairs which control the equilibrium level of a muscle growth hormone. This hormone not only makes the creature become strong with slight provocation but it increases the power of the heart and many other functions.
Suppose a heart that beats too fast also reduces lifespan, leading to seizures at a younger age.
Natural selection may very well move towards early heart attacks if beating the shit out of a predator outweighs dying young.
So back to sexuality, what makes you imagine there is a genetic system which specifies exactly who and what to be attracted to? There isn't, it is obviously a rigged system that is ultimately developed in the brain, by neural connections susceptible to many factors including experience and culture.
Masturbation is perhaps the perfect example, what is the cost of wasting semen? Very little. What causes masturbation? The reserves are constantly being filled, a nerve signals the brain, the psycho-sexual system in the brain becomes more active. That tension can be released by masturbation. Something similar no doubts happens in females.
You may objectively say "that's a waste of time" but natural selection doesn't operate based on rationality but changes. What if the only way to change the described sexual system is to reduce the sex drive? To reduce the amount of semen produced? To only produce semen after being attracted by someone?
All of those things could easily cause a net detriment to fitness far greater than ten minutes a day and a few mL of protein.
40 days later
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
All of those things could easily cause a net detriment to fitness far greater than ten minutes a day and a few mL of protein.
The Panda is a great example. Evolution changes decided to radically lower their sex drive to allow survivors to exist on the scant calories of bamboo instead of starving. If humans lived in a bamboo world, they would be just as sexually lethargic over 1000 generations.
It may very well be that homosexuality was a fit trait passed down for thousands of years to naturally help control population in a way that didn't include starvation and disease. Evolutionary speaking, it's easier to adjust brain chemicals over selected generations than to design a human killing virus or to disrupt entire food webs.
-->
@Greyparrot
All of those things could easily cause a net detriment to fitness far greater than ten minutes a day and a few mL of protein.The Panda is a great example. Evolution changes decided to radically lower their sex drive to allow survivors to exist on the scant calories of bamboo instead of starving. If humans lived in a bamboo world, they would be just as sexually lethargic over 1000 generations.
That's a relevant example.
I usually dominate zoology trivia but I did not know Pandas had low sex drive. Is that why they're having trouble breeding them in captivity?
It may very well be that homosexuality was a fit trait passed down for thousands of years to naturally help control population in a way that didn't include starvation and disease.
That's a theory that a lot of people have but my point is more fundamental.
You came up with some secondary benefit in some circumstances.
I'm saying homosexuality may well be a side effect itself of the entire psycho sexual system. In other words our species could rely heavily on pheromones and seasonal drives as many animals do but what seems to work much better is all this romantic shit where we write poetry about predestined love with absolute loyalty.
Think of all the things heterosexual people can find attractive in others? Is it enough that they have the right genitals? That they are fit and free of major diseases? Do we just beat each other over the head to determine who has the right to mate?
Of course not! The sexual selection in humans is hyper-detailed and almost entirely based on abstract mental constructs.
"I want the proverbs wife"
"I want a man who does X, Y, and Z in such in such situation but makes me feel like A and B but not C"
"His family has huuuuge tracttts of laaand!" <- little bit of a joke, but I am absolutely certain people have had this fetish and probably more in older cultures
I'll invoke @zedvictor4 here. He calls it "overthink", appropriate labeling aside the capacity to be complex and novel goes hand in hand with the range of novel and bizarre errors that are possible.
Humans can be attracted to almost anything about potentially reproductive partners, and it is plausible that the cost of this advantageous flexibility is the disadvantage that if one little thing goes wrong in development then humans can be attracted to almost anything full stop.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Yes pandas, are hard to breed.
I was just offering one of many plausible explanations why evolution would have allowed homosexuality to remain as a fit trait through thousands of generations. I do get your point that chemical attraction is highly complex in order to promote the diversification of genes, and we know that the more complex a system is, the more chances for error.
That's also another plausibility.
-->
@FLRW
How Complex Systems Fail
Humans are failing to save themselves from their practices ----(1) overpopulation for systems currently in place---
Woman { X x } is most complex entity with man {X y } 2nd in complexity and in the following set of 9 --ive seen 16 elsewhere--- there is numerical conplexity of number and combination ofsex chromsomses, not a news sex chromsome, and most importantly,
..." ...A fetus with only one Y chromosome and no X chromosome is not viable and cannot survive.".... i.e. only X chromsome creatures can exist and pop out exact copies of themselves.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
An estimated 1 in 100 Americans is intersex. Around 2% of people worldwide have intersex traits.
..."Any variation from these typical numbers is referred to scientifically as an “aneuploidy.” If there is one additional X or Y, it is known as a “trisomy” (“tri” denoting the number 3). Genetic conditions that reflect a trisomy include:
Trisomies are the most common X and Y aneuploid conditions. Less common are “tetrasomies,” which denote the presence of four sex chromosomes:
Still rarer are the “pentasomies,” indicating five sex chromosomes:
.....Typically, 48- and 49-chromosome variations produce more pronounced symptoms than trisomies, although this is not always the case.
At the other end of the spectrum lie the “monosomies,” meaning a person born with only one sex chromosome. The only survivable monosomy SCA is 45,X. This is a female with only one X chromosome, a condition known as “Turner syndrome.”
.." At present there are 9 countries in the world that possess nuclear weapons. They are:
- Russia ...5,889...
- United States ....5, 224...
- China ..410....
- France ....290..
- United Kingdom ...225...
- Pakistan ...170.. this and india alone would created a near doomsday dust around Earth
- India.......164......" ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "....
- Israel....90....
- North Korea "...30.....
- https://www.icanw.org/nuclear_arsenals
Then there is the hosting nations ...see link....