Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Humble Bundle V Crosses Three Million Dollars

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by dimko View Post
    statement supposed to make me upset?
    Gay people can't conceive kids. By definition of life and nature - they are not normal. I don't hold that against them, though what I say may offend them. Every normal sample of any specie supposed to prolong its kind and benefit to genetic pool. Gays can't do that, not the second part anyway.
    I have arguments, You don't.
    Isn't that kind of like saying people who choose to use birth control aren't normal?

    Or, let's say, people who have survived ovarian cancer and can't have kids?

    Soldiers who were wounded in a "sensitive area", aren't normal?

    I guess it depends on your definition, but it seems to me like your stretching it to fit your pre-conceived notions.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by FutureSuture View Post
      I am no fan of such games myself so I just don't buy them.
      Without judging the specifics of this particular game at all...

      I do think everyone has the right to say, "I don't like the message a particular game sends and I don't want to support it" without being badgered.

      I'm a strong believer in free speech, and that means those games shouldn't be banned or censored if the developer wants to release them, but it also means that consumers should be free to react in whatever way they choose.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by dimko View Post
        Gay people can't conceive kids. By definition of life and nature - they are not normal.
        Originally posted by dimko View Post
        Earth is already over populated or very close so.
        So the natural thing to do is to reproduce endlessly, overrun the planet and destroy its ecosystem?
        I have arguments, You don't.
        Save the planet - be gay!

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by dimko View Post
          You can divide it however you like, fact of the matter, they won't have offspring that way. it's not considered normal.
          On the other hand it seems normal enaugh that so many species produce some homosexual specimen.

          You should really blame the heterosexual parents for producing children that won't reproduce. Following your trail of thought they and the ancestors who produced the parents that produce children that won't reproduce are unnormal too.

          Originally posted by dimko View Post
          Guess, how many generations will pass before disadvantageous genetic traits, like Mongoloid syndrome, homosexuality or sudden death syndrome are wiped out from genetic pool?
          Disadvantageous to whom?

          Have a look here to papers like this or this. Tld;dr: for example the genetic variations that lead to few homosexual people could be advantageous enaugh that some non-reproducing offspring doesn't matter much. And then it has a good chance of not being "wiped out from the genetic pool".


          But what has all this to do with the humble bundle crossing $3 million dollar?

          Comment


          • #50
            omg i am tired of you people peverting my words

            Originally posted by ChrisXY View Post
            On the other hand it seems normal enaugh that so many species produce some homosexual specimen.

            You should really blame the heterosexual parents for producing children that won't reproduce. Following your trail of thought they and the ancestors who produced the parents that produce children that won't reproduce are unnormal too.


            Disadvantageous to whom?

            Have a look here to papers like this or this. Tld;dr: for example the genetic variations that lead to few homosexual people could be advantageous enaugh that some non-reproducing offspring doesn't matter much. And then it has a good chance of not being "wiped out from the genetic pool".


            But what has all this to do with the humble bundle crossing $3 million dollar?
            From those links it is not clear of advantage.
            Further more, they mention fact that gay people can reproduce, which is utter bullshit, where I stopped reading. Gay people who have heterosexual sex? Bisexual may be?
            Also, we look on the problem from different points.

            Human kind has natural selection, gay people can't get through in it. Same as soldiers with broken family jewels, etc. It doesn't make them worse personalities(not even if it's gay soldier with no family jewels). My definition of not normal under circumstance: major barrier to be able to produce healthy offspring, that is capable of passing gene and be useful to humankind. Gays have obvious barrier. Ask yourself, in near feature, when parents will be able to "sort out" potential gay offspring before birth, will they not do it? Some may be, will not. Majority WILL. Ask them why, majority will say: it's not normal.(nor beneficial for passing to new generations)
            Last edited by dimko; 06-07-2012, 11:31 AM. Reason: my shit english

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by dimko View Post
              Further more, they mention fact that gay people can reproduce, which is utter bullshit, where I stopped reading. Gay people who have heterosexual sex? Bisexual may be?
              How is this bullshit? They are plenty of examples in history of gay people who have reproduced. You do not need to necessarily be sexually attracted to someone to have sex with them. Throughout history many gay people have done it, either for the desire to have a child or simply do to the pressures based on society.

              Comment


              • #52
                yes and no

                Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
                How is this bullshit? They are plenty of examples in history of gay people who have reproduced. You do not need to necessarily be sexually attracted to someone to have sex with them. Throughout history many gay people have done it, either for the desire to have a child or simply do to the pressures based on society.
                Females could have sex due to rape or some other compulsion(self induced counts).
                With gay man - I don't think its possible. If you got erection on woman, you are at least bisexual.

                Again, if you read my previous posts you will understand, I don't see everything in black and white color, I see gradation of black or white. Gay community can be proud of artists, musicians(many of who I personally listen to, like HIM, for example, though I can't say he is my favorite artist)

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by dimko View Post
                  Females could have sex due to rape or some other compulsion(self induced counts).
                  With gay man - I don't think its possible. If you got erection on woman, you are at least bisexual.
                  All you have to do is close your eyes and imagine you are in bed with someone else...

                  I mean, if that wasn't possible masturbation would be fairly tough.

                  Plenty of gay men in the past (when it wasn't acceptable to society) ended up getting married, and even had kids.

                  That's not even considering in-vitro fertalization, which is a pretty big business these days.

                  Plus, the fact that there's no science suggesting that the "gay gene" is passed from parents to kids. The vast, vast majority of gay people are born from straight parents.

                  Your point that people might eradicate gay children through eugenics program is valid, though. I know there would be a massive outcry by the public if that started happening, and certainly some parents would not go for abortions based on that for religious reasons, just like they don't abort children with down syndrome. But scientists are already looking into how they can make sheep and other animals that aren't gay (for obvious reasons), and that would likely apply to humans just as much.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    You will also notice he forgot about Lesbians as well, which also makes his point invalid. Plenty of women have had sex with people they were not attracted to.

                    EDIT: On second glance, he did kind of mention it.
                    Last edited by Hamish Wilson; 06-07-2012, 08:42 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by dimko View Post
                      If you got erection on woman, you are at least bisexual.
                      This man got an erection by riding his motorcycle, was he sexually attracted to his motorcycle or are you just ignorant of basic male biology?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X