Homosexuality in Animals, and God (Page 3)

Geoff
Geoff: The gayest thing it is possible to do is worrying about what someone of your sex does with their genitalia.
7 years ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: There was nothing gay about Carl Gustav Jung's assessment of homosexuality as a symptom of the failure to individuate properly. Nor is there anything gay about noticing, as he did, that where that particular form of psychological failure is in evidence to an ever increasing degree, the society so affected has got serious problems on its hands.
7 years ago Report
0
Geoff
Geoff: Society has bigger problems on its hands than homosexuality.

The perpetuation of religion for a start.
7 years ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: No comment.
7 years ago Report
0
calybonos
calybonos: It's a well known fact that both Buddha and Jesus were gay.

They crucified Jesus, but Bhudda, being too fat for such histrionics, was told to just sit quietly.
7 years ago Report
0
Metaverseguy
Metaverseguy: Yes, I've heard many of the people in the psych ward talking about homosexuality amongst religious idols. Did you know they also know about the army of the 12 monkeys?
7 years ago Report
0
chronology
chronology: Geoff does have a point. There is no other group of creature in society that have such sick twisted sex lives as religious people. Jim Jones, David Koresh, and other, buggered, copulated, and molested men women children and sex toys.

Even stranger was the Monastic system, nothing but bestiality and sodomy. Pigs, sheep, cows, no animal was safe. And the Convents were the best lesbian scenes in any country.

Personally I couldn't care less about these freaks, but seriously, for religious people to criticise Gays is a little chucky.
7 years ago Report
0
Metaverseguy
Metaverseguy: Clearly these people were sex addicts and along with being sociopaths who brainwashed followers they decided to have an unrestrained orgy, except that not being able to afford the regular escorts in their local paper he, David Koresh, did it with an underager. Seeing as these people clearly lived without law, not only that but just no common sense or courtesy and had massive amounts of firearms their orgies were seemingly the least "worst" thing they did, and if that's all they did people would probably laugh to themselves when remembering their names, instead of remembering a giant shootout with millions of dollars of equipment and an army of policemen. Any sane professional would agree these people needed intervention, forceable if necessary, but no they pretended that they didn't exist in a society, not only that a little bit of a sick society that salivates at the mouth seeing stories like this.
7 years ago Report
0
chronology
chronology: Well sure perverts like Koresh or Jones were extreme examples of psychopathic sexual behavour but the plain truth is that however much the churches tried to drive out sex from peoples lives, they never succeeded either in monesteries or out of them. Why child sex became so common in churches in the 1960s and later is frankly puzzling. But according to the numerous convinctions in the courts it was happening. And the rate or percentage of homosexual clergy was higher than avarage at a time when churches were condemning Gays publicly.

If you are trying to say 'society' is sick, then what does that make a religion that publicly slams homosexuality, then privately revels in it?

To me all this 'hollyer than thou' stuff brings back memories of Nathaniel Hawthorn and 'The Scarlet Letter' where the Pastor Publicly spoke against the woman who fell pregnant out of wedlock, while secretly he was the father of the child.

You seem to critisice the rescue of the misguided criminals at Wako, when there was a good chance of those nuts turning to canabalism when their food ran out. And first on the chopping block would have been the babies, then the women.

The only sick people in Wako were the nuts in the compound.
7 years ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: "Even stranger was the Monastic system, nothing but bestiality and sodomy. Pigs, sheep, cows, no animal was safe. And the Convents were the best lesbian scenes in any country."

It would be interesting to see proof of this, if a little stomach-turning. Fortunately for our sanity, it is in reality complete fabrication. Sounds like something from some 19th century anti-Catholic bigot. I thought that stuff went out with the ark, but, live and learn.
7 years ago Report
0
calybonos
calybonos: I just want to go on record that on the rare occasions that I took part in bestiality, I was drunk and I needed the money. And I always made sure that my female human partner was cute, in a two-legged sort of way.

Admittedly, most of the time I was just a pork tease.
7 years ago Report
1
chronology
chronology: As usual, if religious people disagree with something then they say it is lies or 'tricks of the devil' .

Actually am not anti catholic, I couldn't care less about catholics or their religion.

Monesteries were even worse than I have noted so far, do you really want me to go into all the activities of monasteries? the Gay orgies? the con tricks for religious visitors where they set up Jesus on a cross rigged with pully strings and had his mouth opening and closing so a monk in hiding could use vetriloqry to make it seem Jesus was talking?

Actually I did get a little mixed up with my memory of the debauchery in monasteries, I thought it was 'ten days penance' for sex with a cow, it was actually 'ten years' penance. A blow job from another monk would get you five years penance.

Am not suggesting the monks were 'evil' but simply misguided. Martin Luther speaks of how he was often driven to 'pollutions' while he was a monk which some suggest was sodomy, but more likely it was just masturbation, although he accused many monasteries of practicing sodomy. The 'Dark Ages' were just that, very dark indeed. Alcohol was another problem that grew in monesteries, many monks were stumbling drunks virtually all their very sad lives. Why do you think most European breweries began in monasteries?

The truth of religious orders is most likely somewhere between the sensation stories and the 'Sound of Music' BS .

If you want really dark stories of life in convents and monesteries, then do a little research into the history of Satanism in those places. Nasty.
7 years ago Report
0
Metaverseguy
Metaverseguy: Focusing on what religious people say is kind of like focusing on pigs feces and then getting angry that they continue to defecate. They will always defecate one day they are not going to plant flowers from their rectum. The group religious people is so large that its about half of everyone. If you have twitter you know that the majority of posts are insipid, racist, ignorant hateful comments. Being surprised that this continues is kind of like being surprised that the sun comes out. What is more surprising is if one day everyone on twitter posts happy comments.

If you are going to focus on religious people you need to focus on what the pope or cardinals say, or some other higher-up, or maybe even a televangelist like Joel Osteen or Pat Robertson. The pope's comments are funneled through others so before he makes a speech, someone will double-check it and be like 'ok don't say anything about women, gays, or jews today' so then if you hear in a speech all this crazy anti-semantic, gung ho war support that may be very different from the usual 'love thy neighbor' stuff and then you may ask yourself about the change in rhetoric.
(Edited by Metaverseguy)
7 years ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: I don't want you to go into any details that bore you, chronology. I'm pretty sure they bore your readers too. I want you to give evidence of what you are saying. The fact that you don't is a rather striking characteristic of your charges, which just keep getting repeated without substantiation.

7 years ago Report
0
chronology
chronology: Shadow well any enquiries into the history of monasteries by even a half hearted student will provide all the data you want.
7 years ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: Is that a fact.
7 years ago Report
0
chronology
chronology: Yes
7 years ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: I claim the right to remain skeptical. However, I have been interested in medieval history before. I suppose I could be again.
7 years ago Report
0
suchso
suchso: If homosexuality is natural, then why condemn the religious people who might (or not) have engaged in it? Does that not make them innocent?
After all, if animals do it, it must be natural.

Homosexuality in animals is no reason to support it in humans, otherwise it follows that you should accept all animal behaviour as acceptable in human society.
7 years ago Report
1
suchso
suchso: And to Cowin's point about humans are animals.
It's true that humans are classified as animal, and not vegetable or mineral. But to deny the difference between humans and all other animals would have to be simple ignorance.
And that is what makes us different -
Awareness, as opposed to animal instinct and ignorance.
I am human - I am not a mere animal. I would thank you for respecting that some of us humans are evolving beyond animal instinct.

But alas... it's obvious that you some of you animals cannot understand human concepts!!
*stirs the pot*
7 years ago Report
0
The13th
The13th: shadow, its a bit hard to compile evidence of monasteries sex .... but I do suggest if possible you make a few days visit to those outback australia monastery when they have their yearly break and most students are away. With only a handful of men in the empty large monastery, you will most likely feel that the air is cracking with sexual tension.

Even if you dont find any evidence its good to feel the greatness and loneliness and sadness of outback, where you can drive 150km/hr but feel that you are actually moving very slowly.
7 years ago Report
0
suchso
suchso: I went to a catholic school for a while, as a day student, which was also a boarding school for rural country kids.

I would not like to be left at a boarding schoool during school holidays. Regardless of the religion or state.
:shivers:
7 years ago Report
0
Corwin
Corwin: "to deny the difference between humans and all other animals would have to be simple ignorance."
"I am human - I am not a mere animal. I would thank you for respecting that some of us humans are evolving beyond animal instinct."

I think you must have missed several of my previous points... of course we're "different", just as any species is different from another... but to say we're "better" is simply human arrogance, and the verdict is not out on that yet.

And you use the word "instinct" like it's a bad word... if you think that human behavior has nothing to do with instinct, then you are the ignorant one. Even civilization itself is a product of human instinct, with the totality of this civilization's collective behavior akin to a "wild animal" which no individual man's "free-will" can truly control and tame. Our ability to reflect upon the past, present and possible future of this civilization, offers little in terms of altering the course of human events... and above all of these human instincts which determine our behavior is the instinct to survive.
A few of my previous points:

- Nature pretty much has one rule... survive, or don't.

- There's this Human arrogance that we feel we are "above" the animal Kingdom, or "separate" from it somehow... we're just a member of it like any other species. Sure, we have art, and literature, and science, and religion, and technology, and architecture... but what difference does any of that make if we end up going extinct?

- is a "technological society" [i.e. the above mentioned things that make us different from other animals] advantageous to long-term survival as a species? Only time will tell... if we end up devising the manner of our own extinction and blowing ourselves to Kingdom Come, this technological species of Primate known as Homo Sapiens will turn out to be an evolutionary dead-end... in that scenario the Chimps [or the cockroaches for that matter] could end up being the superior species after all, if they survive and we don't.
7 years ago Report
0
calybonos
calybonos: Homo Sapiens equal to Sus scrofa domesticus?

Dream on, pal.
7 years ago Report
0
suchso
suchso: Just different ways of looking at the same issue. My sense of morals and views on this topic are rational in my own mind. And since I am animal, they are natural. I guess I've evolved differently to the mainstream mindset.
One animal submits to sexual advances from the same sex while another one is offended by it.
And both are natural.

I wouldn't say we are better, but further evolved and more conscious and aware.
One big difference is that humans have learned to override their instincts, whereas all other animals are slaves to their instinctive nature. Except for the domesticated ones I guess. Like Calybonos.

In fact, it is us humans who control the nature of other animals, as well as our own.

I know my physical body is animal, my conscience is something else. I think if the human race is to survive, we need to expand our conscious, and control our instinctive nature even more. Otherwise, the Earth may well end up devoid of humans.
7 years ago Report
0