>Homosexuality is okay!
>It happens in nature!
If you say this, everyone agrees
>Rape is okay!
>It happens in nature!
But if you say this, suddenly no one wants to sit next to you at lunch.
What gives? Are liberals really that stupid?
Nowadays with this moral relativism garbage having morals doesn't even make sense. without believing in a god morals are just based on whatever the common consensus is
The morals meme is owned by liberals now
>What gives? Are liberals really that stupid?
i tend to think of them as being closed minded
>>everyone ITT
>I have lost the ability to relate to other humans due to subscribing to radical political ideologies peddled to me on a site that communicates emotions through cartoon frogs
The mental gymnastics needed to equate the rejection of homophobia with the rejection of rape is magisterial.
It is pre-pubscent Chinese girl, quadruple somersault 1080 kind of impressive.
Very, very impressive. I hope you go on with your life and prosper, at some point, and I mean internally, not monetarily.
>>56534103
>Homosexuality is okay!
>It happens in nature!
>If you say this, everyone agrees
I've heard it used to rebuke the claim that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, since animals don't choose their lifestyle.
>>56534103
>two gays fuck each other in the ass
>it only affects them, no one cares
>one guy rapes a girl
>she is traumatized, everyone cares
seems pretty similar desu senpai
>>56535169
>>she is traumatized, everyone cares
Why would having an actual orgasm traumatize her? I never understood the "rape is traumatizing" meme.
no money system and jobs their just groups with people do what they want based on their talent some are good hunter some are good handworker etc just a fast idea meh
>>56535169
The point is that gays are bad and you can't just use "muh nature" to try and justify it.
>>56535077
Was this an attempt at an argument? Or just an elaborate ad hominem to ridicule those who have opinions contrary to you?
I really can't tell. All you did was say how silly we are and how silly we are for thinking that appeals to nature are justifiable.
>>56534103
>muh nature argument
There is a reason it is a fallacy.
>>56534103
>But if you say this, suddenly no one wants to sit next to you at lunch.
Rape isn't consensual, it's a violent crime.
Consensual sex needs a different analogy.
>>56534103
fags don't hurt anybody
>>56535419
Bad to who exactly? How are they attacking the average citizen?
>Animals are gay real with it!
Mention that animals also eat their young
>SICKO UHHH!
Well you can't have it both ways....
>>56535835
They're bad to humanity because of bugchasers and aids.
i think everyone on /pol/ is aware of how stupid the appeal to nature is and most of the time liberals aren't even using this falacy to justify homosexuality. The only time I actually heard it was on TV when they asked young muslims why they thought homosexuality should be punished.
Most of the time liberals will just say that two consenting people can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't disturb public order
>>56534103
It's called appeal to nature, and yes, it is a logical fallacy. Animals rape, cannibalize, eat shit, and do all sorts of other shit humans tend to not do.
>>56535974
No one argues that being gay is ok because it's natural; it's ok because why shouldn't it be? Why on earth do you care? It's like thinking blowjobs are bad and that no one else should be able to participate in a blowjob.
Just fuck off and have the sex you want to have and let other people do the same.
>>56536217
>No one argues that being gay is ok because it's natural
>>56536217
You don't understand, they want to dictate what people do in the bedroom so they can feel better about their own shitty sex lives. They go on and on about morality but in reality they're sexually repressed and miserable. There's literally no reason to hate on homosexuals, fags are a different story. They are obnoxious and downright degenerate.
>>56535077
>all these big girl words
>enough ad hominum to choke a gay man
>>56535112
>Murder is okay!
>It happens in nature!
If you say this you will become a pariah
But seriously legalize murder when?
>>56536085
That's fair. Can't we work on education to avoid spread, then? What are the numbers on AIDS growth these days?
>>56536217
>>56536384
it seems like it's most often used to counter the "it's unnatural, therefore it's bad" argument that people use against it
>>56536217
You do realize that gay sex is linked with vastly higher rates of STD transmission right? Same with whores. Human psyche has evolved to see sexual perverse/promiscuous people as dirty because historically and currently those people actually are more likely to be riddled with disease
>>56536564
You can't educate a fetish (bugchasing/spreading) out of someone.
>>56536437
This. I confuse myself sometimes and think I hate gays but no; honestly I can't stand faggots.
At the same time though openly accepting gays opens new doors to more extreme acceptance. That's why I oppose it.
>>56534103
Other than in humans, where does rape happen in nature
>>56536725
Ducks, frogs, bears and dogs all rape each other, at least those are the ones I know rape each other
>>56536708
Pretty sure getting AIDS isn't a fetish anon
Might be for some real fucked peeps, but among the general hetero and homo populous, i'd say no.
>>56536696
being gay != being promiscuous
hate on sluts if that's what bothers you
>>56536854
most animals "rape" each other simply because "consent" is just human emotional shit
>>56536854
cats nigga you ever see those fuckers fucking
every human on the planet exists because of rape. we should celebrate rape. have an international rape day. ravage all the pussies. we'll be up to 20 billion in no time.
>>56534103
Homosexuality doesn't hurt anybody, OP. Rape does.
>>56536886
There is like a handful of people who have a fetish for HIV and want to be infected.
Like it's not even worth mentioning when you see HIV rates for african women and men.
Charlie sheen has given more aids to women than any gay dude.
>what is consent
>>56536217
Agreed
IT'S 2015 I MEAN COME ON
>>56536996
ya, but anal sex is considered risky and transmits diseases way easier because of micro-tears and the higher likely hood of bleeding and exchange of fluids. And gays tend to enjoy anal sex. I guess if gays only blew each other than that wouldn't be a problem but they do other shit too. But desu, i've never met a homo older than 25 who hasn't fucked at least 20 guys, and most hetero people around 25 average about 5 people
>>56536717
You do realize that not accepting homosexuality is the reason a lot of them act like faggots right? It's a form of signaling. Sure, it's not necessary anymore, but it used to be and it became entrenched because of it. Is still popular because gays are still viewed negatively by the general public so they gravitate toward gay culture, where they feel comfortable. This understandably leads them to act like faggots since it's a way of fitting in in that community. You see, if we completely accepted homosexuals, they'd feel normal and wouldn't need to succumb to faggot behavior. What other forms of acceptance would this lead to, by the way? Trannies are confirmed mentally ill (they think they're something they arent), pedos and other sexual deviancy usually isn't consensual so it'll never be acceptable, and tumblr-tier nonsense is all make believe and everyone knows it. So what do you mean by that statement?
>>56537216
did 4chan insert desu into my sentence? what is this shit. is there a filter i do not know about?
>>56537241
This is true. Many men online look for homosex but completely despise the culture; fags are a niche fetish as far as I can tell.
>>56537241
I think there will always be faggots because men + men is a more sexual dynamic than female + male, but encouraging monogamy would definitely reduce the shitty behavior
>>56535077
You've been baited by a liberal shill and you are also bait. I am bait too btw
>>56534103
>trying to rationalize liberalism
>>56535169
>it only affects them
Ever heard of AIDS? Breaking natural law always carries a price tag. The homosexual debate needs to be defined and refined into what is actually acceptable under natural law.
>>56534103
Pedophilia happens in nature too, try to use that instead of rape. I am sure it will give better results.
>>56537488
>australia
>bait
you're being a bit redundant desu
>>56534103
>being unable to decipher the difference between being born a certain way and violently forcing your penis into another person against their will.
this is why every argument on /po/ against liberals is moot.
You are all critically retarded.
>>56537616
>natural law
show me where nature states its intentions
>>56537628
>still doesn't understand consent.
British "education," everyone.
>>56537701
It's not our fault liberals make fallacious arguments to begin with.
>>56537857
Jokeyourhead.joc
I am saying that if OP is gonna defend rape in public, he should try defending pedos, since it will give more keks.
>>56537910
but its not fictitious. There are definitely animals that are homo-sexual
we even have transgender/hermaphrodite plants.
>>56535260
Basement dweller detected
>>56536725
most mammals practice rape, along with infanticide
insects usually murder their partner afterwards
>>56538095
>transgender
Plants don't suffer from mental illnesses.
Just because something is natural does not make it acceptable.
Marking your territory with urine is common throughout the animal world. Does this mean pissing in fire hydrants is? Absolutely not.
>>56537789
life and death are about the only declarations
>>56538447
>inb4 you give me some false analogy bullshit
They're perfect analogies that serve to prove behaviors aren't acceptable because they're natural.
exactly
>hurr straight people do anal sex as well
this is what faggots say when you tell them sodomy is an abomination.
obviously, straight people can do abominable acts if they wish, but a homo is defined by his abominable acts... no difference between a homo and someone saying "i'm a rape-osexual"
>>56537488
Me too
>>56538053
Well, shit. I didn't read that far into it but I see what you're saying. Sorry for the misunderstanding, bong.
>>56538571
chopping off your dick and calling yourself a woman is a behavior. Rape is a behavior. Being Gay is a mentality, identifying with females over males when you're a male is a mentality. Should we support body mutilation because someone is having a weird trip? probably not. but what would the grounds be for telling two homosexuals, that they can't be homosexual? They're not hurting anyone or violating anyone's civil liberties. For you to satnd there and saay, homosexuality should be outlawed, that makes you the larger offender against liberty, and makes you the enemy that deserves the death of a faggot.
>>56538571
"Homosexuality is natural" is the reply to "homosexuality is unnatural" not defense of the behavior, maybe you should learn some basic things about debate, arguments and critical thinking first
>>56534103
You just cant argue with those peoples,
atheists and liberals are no different from cattle.
>>56539058
also, the reason why anal-sex was banned to begin with, was because in the old days, rips and tears in the anus caused the gay population to have a much higher rate of disease, with the intestine walls become infected and such. When people were ignorant and uneducated because they didn't know shit about shit because they lived in the stone age and couldn't into science, they thought disease was a punishment sent down directly from God and that God must be punishing them. So then, it was outlawed.
Anti-gay christfags are literally basing their arguments off of stone-aged logic that they dont understand. Quite literally, enemies of evolution to retarded to get past policies written hundreds and thousands of years ago from a time they wouldn't understand to begin with. I would rather it be a crime that Evangelical / Conservative Christians were outlawed than to outlaw gays.
>>56539351
>"Homosexuality is natural" is the reply to "homosexuality is unnatural" not defense of the behavior
According to who exactly? It's not unusual of liberals to create (keep in mind they're not replies to a previously made argument) arguments with appeals to nature in order to justify certain behaviors.
>>56539757
People still think it's a punishment sent down from god. Those people reside here on /pol/.
One step above ISIS level degeneracy desu senpai.
>>56539932
heres an appeal to human historical record
sodomy exists, deal with it
>>56539932
You can find other animals engage in homosexual behavior.
Again, it's not appealing to nature because stating that it occurs in nature isn't the same as saying that because it's natural that it's good. Though, you will find liberals who make that very argument and are wrong because of it.
I mean, cyanide is natural.
Sup /pol/, idk if i thread has already existed or what not but do ye's think the syrian crisis was caused by the Syrian banking system, or in fact in opposition to it? All syrian banks are state controlled with no outside influence other than market fluctuations, ill provide sauce to related story. https://www.rt.com/op-edge/syria-world-hate-message-604/
>>56540482
What the hell does that have to do with the topic at hand? Start another thread, new friend.
>>56539757
Who's talking about buttsex, Christianity and the outlawing of gays? I wouldn't want to be outlawed. Besides, you're moving the goalposts so hard I'm having a hard time keeping up.
All I'm saying is behaviors (homosexuality is a behavior ; being attracted to something is a behavior, not a mentality) can't be justified simply because they're natural. Instead, you talk about Christianity, gay disease rates, how anal sex destroys the body and how science was discarded for God in the old days. And you manage to throw an insult or two and Christians.
>>56538920
>American "comprehension" everybody
