Another reason why religion is complete BS (Jehovah's Witness edition)

[cantthinkofanything]

Serious question coming. Personally, I really don't give a if gays marry. To each his own. I realize that from many Christian standpoints, sexuality is wrong. But from an evolutionary standpoint, doesn't sexuality fly in the face of long term survival of a species? Spermbanks not withstanding. Or vice-versa, is it a form of population control that actually is beneficial to the survival of the species?

[DarkReign]

Serious question coming. Personally, I really don't give a if gays marry. To each his own. I realize that from many Christian standpoints, sexuality is wrong. But from an evolutionary standpoint, doesn't sexuality fly in the face of long term survival of a species? Spermbanks not withstanding. Or vice-versa, is it a form of population control that actually is beneficial to the survival of the species?

sexuality is well-do ented in the mammal kingdom, specifically in social mammals. That is, any mammal which spends its life in a social setting with members of their same species, sexuality exists.

Most of the time its a bisexual proclivity, but in apes, it can be the exclusive practice.

I have not heard of sexuality existing in whales (not a social species, really) or dolphins (very social). But in land-based, social mammals, sexuality is literally everywhere. From rats, mice, lemurs, apes and humans, it is not uncommon. I will say, I havent heard of it in elephants, though (a very social mammal). They must have an oral, organized religion preventing it.

[DeadlyDynasty]

is it a form of population control that actually is beneficial to the survival of the species?

Indirectly, yes.

[jag]

sexuality is well-do ented in the mammal kingdom, specifically in social mammals. That is, any mammal which spends its life in a social setting with members of their same species, sexuality exists.

I heard this over and over and pretty much just accepted it. Then I actually did some research into it and realized how extremely rare it is to find actual sexual "orientation" in mammals/animals. And that makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint. What is more commonly observed is "bisexual" behavior.

It's an interesting idea because it pretty much leads back to a 'nature vs. nurture' argument. Many people have argued that sexuality is genetically linked. If "gay" animals are not passing their "gay gene", then that gene would ultimately disappear.

I don't doubt that there are some limp-wristed animals out there. But it would be interesting to see what kind of role was played by any unique cir stances in their respective environments.

[ALVAREZ6]

sexuality is well-do ented in the mammal kingdom, specifically in social mammals. That is, any mammal which spends its life in a social setting with members of their same species, sexuality exists.

Most of the time its a bisexual proclivity, but in apes, it can be the exclusive practice.

I have not heard of sexuality existing in whales (not a social species, really) or dolphins (very social). But in land-based, social mammals, sexuality is literally everywhere. From rats, mice, lemurs, apes and humans, it is not uncommon. I will say, I havent heard of it in elephants, though (a very social mammal). They must have an oral, organized religion preventing it.

Well the obvious response is that those bi or sexual animals are going to .

It's not that I think it hurts me in any way. Calling something marriage has nothing to do with whether it hurts me or not. It's just a belief that union between man and women is what makes a marriage.

Based on mother- ing what? Because that's simply the way it has always been under law? Original, long-standing interpretations should be perpetually accepted..just because?


What's your take on driving under the influence? For centuries, there were no such DUI laws. That's because there were no cars. Eventually, people learned that it makes sense to have a law which makes it illegal to drive under the influence because alcohol impairs your ability to drive. There was a reason for the law. Things need to be updated as humans progress. Why can't you accept that social laws also need to be kept up to date?


Don't you believe there should be a reason for every single law we have? Like an actual purpose, not something like "oh just because that's what I think it should be"... I don't get why Christians NEED to force their beliefs into law, and can't just simply abide by their personal religious believes in their own personal lives. They just have to enforce their onto literally everyone, otherwise things are out of order.


In a country where religious freedom is a right guaranteed to all of its citizens, it's inconsistent to have laws influenced by any 1 religion. This is the 21st century. Every law should serve a purpose.

[Agloco]

She's a troll btw.

[mingus]

but you still want to be selfish and not give gays the right to marry other gays.

why?

Marriage is an ins ution created by straight people for straight people. Just like BET was created by black people for black people. Or Harvard was created by smart people for smart people.

You can't please everyone. Some people are going to be excluded from certain things. It's not a fair world.

[boutons_deux]

They're making NEW LAWS specifically to interfere with legal relations between consulting adults. "Christian" Taleban and "Christian" hate groups practicing what Christ didn't teach.

[mingus]

sexuality is well-do ented in the mammal kingdom, specifically in social mammals. That is, any mammal which spends its life in a social setting with members of their same species, sexuality exists.

Most of the time its a bisexual proclivity, but in apes, it can be the exclusive practice.

I have not heard of sexuality existing in whales (not a social species, really) or dolphins (very social). But in land-based, social mammals, sexuality is literally everywhere. From rats, mice, lemurs, apes and humans, it is not uncommon. I will say, I havent heard of it in elephants, though (a very social mammal). They must have an oral, organized religion preventing it.

it may be because elephant males are solitary for most of their lives. females are sexually active for only a few days days every 3-9 years.

[baseline bum]

I support traditional marriage, and think we need to say to with the new-fangled garbage parading under its name. Marriage should be what it has been for most of human history: the union between one man and many women, sold off by their fathers into slavery.

[ALVAREZ6]

Marriage is an ins ution created by straight people for straight people. Just like BET was created by black people for black people. Or Harvard was created by smart people for smart people.

You can't please everyone. Some people are going to be excluded from certain things. It's not a fair world.

BET is a private company/network. Harvard is a private university. You seem to not understand that we're discussing a law, which is not supposed to be unfair. There has to be a legitimate purpose for every law, otherwise it is unnecessary.

You have ignored my question, so I will re post my previous post:

It's not that I think it hurts me in any way. Calling something marriage has nothing to do with whether it hurts me or not. It's just a belief that union between man and women is what makes a marriage.

Based on mother- ing what? Because that's simply the way it has always been under law? Original, long-standing interpretations should be perpetually accepted..just because?


What's your take on driving under the influence? For centuries, there were no such DUI laws. That's because there were no cars. Eventually, people learned that it makes sense to have a law which makes it illegal to drive under the influence because alcohol impairs your ability to drive. There was a reason for the law. Things need to be updated as humans progress. Why can't you accept that social laws also need to be kept up to date?


Don't you believe there should be a reason for every single law we have? Like an actual purpose, not something like "oh just because that's what I think it should be"... I don't get why Christians NEED to force their beliefs into law, and can't just simply abide by their personal religious believes in their own personal lives. They just have to enforce their onto literally everyone, otherwise things are out of order.


In a country where religious freedom is a right guaranteed to all of its citizens, it's inconsistent to have laws influenced by any 1 religion. This is the 21st century. Every law should serve a purpose.

[ALVAREZ6]

mingus, if you were a consistent, you would support African-American slavery, today. You would still be irrational, but you would at least be consistent.


Likewise, if our laws were consistent, there would be 3 potential routes from here:
1. Reintroduce slavery
2. Become a Christian nation, taking away religious freedoms
3. Accept gay marriage

[Drachen]

What I get from this thread is that I need to up my belligerence on religion...

YOU? I am further down than you are. I will have to swear off civil discourse for a while. Do you think Wild Cobra gives lessons?

[Blake]

it may be because elephant males are solitary for most of their lives.

co-signed,
priests

[Blake]

You can't please everyone. Some people are going to be excluded from certain things. It's not a fair world.

Marriage rights can very easily be made fair.

What's a good reason not to give gays marriage rights?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Marriage is a religious ins ution. It was created to give various priest classes authorith over families and decent patterns. Get involved in that and there kids are brought into be indoctrinated as well. Cute little cycle.

If you want to be monogamous then more power to you but I do not like that a religion's license to is sanctioned by the government.

[DarkReign]

I heard this over and over and pretty much just accepted it. Then I actually did some research into it and realized how extremely rare it is to find actual sexual "orientation" in mammals/animals. And that makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint. What is more commonly observed is "bisexual" behavior.

It's an interesting idea because it pretty much leads back to a 'nature vs. nurture' argument. Many people have argued that sexuality is genetically linked. If "gay" animals are not passing their "gay gene", then that gene would ultimately disappear.

I don't doubt that there are some limp-wristed animals out there. But it would be interesting to see what kind of role was played by any unique cir stances in their respective environments.

According to this research, sexuality is quite common in the great apes, and by extension, humans.

Obviously, I have not been out in the field myself to do the research first-hand, but I trust the source. Its been more than a few years since I read the book, however.

Off point: This book is phenomenal. Gives a very inside look at the social dynamics of chimps specifically and apes in general. They concentrate on chimps because of eerily similar they are in behavior to pre-civilization humans. Tribal war, murder, serial rape, what we would call hedonism, etc.

The most compelling, for me, was chimps want to make war with rivals "next door". They form troops, mostly male but sometimes a few females too, and they patrol their "borders" looking for any intrusions. Most disturbingly is the most aggressive chimps (both male and female) will purposely enter enemy territory and seek out any rivals wandering too close to the border. They will then murder that chimp in the most brutal ways possible via rape (both male and females will be raped) and bludgeoning. They then drag the carcass around, almost as a trophy...but also, it is postulated, as a warning.

Apes cry, they mourn, they masturbate, they rape, the weak males are sometimes strictly sexual (as a means to stay in the troop), bisexuality is common, especially amongst the females, war, murder, organization. Lots of stuff in that book.

Just really fascinating stuff.

[boutons_deux]

cannibalism... goes great with Chianti

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Marriage is an ins ution created by straight people for straight people.

No it's not. Marriage has been around since ancient greece and there was plenty of "non-traditional" marriage back then.

[mingus]

It's still not marriage. Not in my book. I have gay friends too. , I'm actually doing a project with a gay guy. He invited me over to his house and we played Gears of War 3 a month ago. I've had enough affirmation from the gay people I've met to back up the fact that I don't hate them. And they get along with me fine. Hey, maybe ill change my mind on it sometime. Right now though I don't believe it's marriage. I've changed my views a number of times in my life on things but I do it on my terms and at my pace.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

lol "I even have gay friends!"

Just like when the Nazis said they had Jewish friends

[Monostradamus]

Just like BET was created by black people for black people.

crofl might want to use a different example tbh. BET wouldn't exist if it wasn't for this guy.

http://www.forbes.com/profile/john-malone/

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's still not marriage. Not in my book. I have gay friends too. , I'm actually doing a project with a gay guy. He invited me over to his house and we played Gears of War 3 a month ago. I've had enough affirmation from the gay people I've met to back up the fact that I don't hate them. And they get along with me fine. Hey, maybe ill change my mind on it sometime. Right now though I don't believe it's marriage. I've changed my views a number of times in my life on things but I do it on my terms and at my pace.

So basically if a muslim, aborigine or hindu hetero couple gets married in their whatever ceremony then thats cool but if a couple gets married in whatever ceremony then your christian god does not recognize it and therefor its not a marriage?

[DMC]

cannibalism... goes great with Chianti

And fava beans

[DMC]

Marriage rights can very easily be made fair.

What's a good reason not to give gays marriage rights?

Give? They either have that right or they do not. The question would be whether to fight so they can exercise those rights or ignore that they are being denied them.

None of us are in a position to give rights.

No one has the right to tell another adult who they can and cannot make marriage vows with. Honoring those vows is a state thing, but it should not be.