Jul 5 2005, 12:03 pm
In response to Jamesburrow
|
|
Vans
 |
Im eating, and this whole topic made me sick >.<
|
ya but I thought the oxygen was transfered to and from with cells and other little mechanics and the virus would not come in direct contact? Maybe he just ment air and didn't specify and I thought he said oxygen... I don't know biology and micro organisms isn't something I've taken courses nor been interested in...
I just thought those things my teachers said were funny. | |
Jamesburrow wrote:
Besides, they say that HIV/AIDS was caused by having sex with monkeys. It is? Er... oops! | |
Jamesburrow wrote:
Actually, they say thats what really caused it. "They"? Who is "they", exactly? Besides, sex can't cause a virus. | |
Sorry I haven't been on for so long to keep up my posts, my mom was married last week and I had to spend the rest of it with my friend. *uhem* As far as I can tell from movies and limited theories is that HIV/AIDS originated in Africa. It was first a simian disease which did not affect them in the same way it does us. Considering that it most likely had to have been some form of eating an infected monkey since it would cause a large spread of the virus the small village was infected. Since no one knew of the disease and it's effects it most certinaly raised thoughts of humanitarians. Perhaps it was an the time before they realized the dangers of blood getting on you but most likely a doctor or soldier, or plain traveler had some blood transfused (open wound blood got into some of his stream) from an infected person and went back to other countries. They had children and so and so it spread.
The thought that a certian group is the main reason and purposly does it is not only silly, but completly moronic. Saying that all Muslims hate America and want to kill us is an example. To repsond to some questions at me, no im not gay but I find nothing wrong with them. As long as you don't flirt with me Im okay with ya. I really don't think that some of these foolish ideas of "If your near...." or "If you breathe...." that you'll get their "disease" is smart. Now the teacher thing is proably not to right. Most viruses can survive for a small amount of time in open air. HIV/AIDS is NOT a blood disease though. It is an immunity disease. It goes after (may be wrong on the type) T Cells causing them to no longer produce a certian cell stop white blood cells from destroying them. When this happens your immune system will begin to fail and once the T-Cells reach a certian level you will be nearly defensles to most disease. In most cases of AIDS the virus influenza aka. the common cold can kill someone or put them in serious problems. Jim and Bob seriously need to get their act together and get over their homophobia. | |
The only 'Nazi' I know in BYOND is SuperA.... and I respect him(Maybe). I've seen alot idiots in BYOND start saying "HEIL!" like if they where Nazi, but these people aren't Nazi's(?) they are ignorant(I will die if I ever heard a Nazi say "OMG u R stupid!"). As for gay people I respect them(Is not that I'm gay)and I accept anyone even thought I'm a Communist. You need to respect the people around you. You live in a wonderful world why bother getting angry for something you're against. If you don't like gay people ignore them they are ignoring you! If jim and bob where fooling around about being like Hitler they need to read history Germans lost to those sub-human Russians with there dang T-34 n.n.
| |
Are you a freaking moron? There is no Nazi pary. If you're talking about the 'neo-nazis' they're a bunch of skinhead racists trying to thrive off the name of a great German party that existed in early to mid 20th century.
| |
Alright, this thread is getting annoying. What is this, gay pride forum?
People who are against homosexuality have nothing wrong with them. Granted, those people you mentioned didn't sound too bright. Homosexuality is most definately not natural. The only accounts of animals doing it are isolated incidents, and I have never heard of an animal that has sex with only those of the same gender. It is more like an accident; hey, animals aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. Of course, the fact that something is not natural does not automatically make it bad; but it certainly does mean that we have every right to dislike it if we so choose without being subject to hate posts. You do what you want in your home, I'll do what I want in mine; and if I have no right to hate you for your decision (not that I would anyway), you have no right to hate me for mine. Of course, I don't hate people for their sexual orientation. I might highly dislike someones choice, but I will be friendly to the person all the same, and continue to be friends as long as they don't hit on me. However, I can just as easily bash you people as you can bash us. For instance, calling everyone who does not agree with you a homophobe is a highly innacurate and degrading thing to do, as most of us are not afraid of it in any way; and as such you are just as guilty of insulting others as others are of insulting you and/or your ideals. I wonder why this bashfest nonsense thread has not been closed, as even its original post was little more than a poorly written flame. | |
Please tell my that by great you meant large not good... If it was the latter go and watch some of the History channel specials on what Hitler really did to the Jews. It is one of the more greusome things I've ever seen.
| |
Loduwijk wrote:
Homosexuality is most definately not natural. The only accounts of animals doing it are isolated incidents, and I have never heard of an animal that has sex with only those of the same gender. Rubbish! I've had dogs try to mate with my leg all the time...if that's not gay, I don't know what is. :p It is more like an accident; hey, animals aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. You could say that all animals are gay, but accidently have sex with females. | |
I never really wanted this to be flaming (if anything it seems to have gotten into how aids came and Nazi's....where did we get Nazis?) but some parts of it have. I do concure that it is your choice to not like Homosexuals but I find it strange that these two men would just randomly attack any gay person they found. No reason and they believe gays are the cause of more deaths then Jewish concentration camps....these two men deffinetly need to get their priorities straight.
| |
I would post you a link to articles (scholarly and "on the lighter side" style) about mated pairs of male penguins who have been together... in the presence of unmated females... in the zoos for years, but you'd claim that's isolated incidents and that we can't count what happens in captivity.
So I'd make sure to flag where the articles specifically compare this to same-sex pairings of "mated for life" bird species, but you'd call those isolated incidents... which is a shame because these articles also detail how birds use pleasure-sex to do things like form social bonds and help their place in the "pecking order", things that supposedly only humans/sentient animals do. I'd also try to dig up the study of a penguin species where the natural fixed ratio in which homosexuality occurs in the wild is as high as one in seven. And then I'd send you to articles about the whole tribes of bonobos (primates, not the sharpest tool in the shed but also not the dimmest star in the heavenl firmament) where females have almost 100% of the control in picking their own sexual partners, and about 30% choose (of course, who can know the mind of a monkey? "Choose" is a word here, but you and I don't know if it's choice or instinct) female partners... a smaller percentage end up with females exclusively. I'd send you to articles about reptile species that reproduce parthenogenically (meaning, each child is an exact clone of the mother) but still tries to reproduce only within the bounds of a mated pairing (and, for those who aren't quite getting this, if every new member of the species is a clone of its mother, that means all the mated pairings are female-female), who engage in all the activities of a mated pair, including sex. The studies which say homosexuality does not occur in nature... if they go into any detail... end up describing homosexual actions and even homosexually mated pairings, because in any study of an animal population broad enough to be statistically significant, you're going to find these things. However, they end up coming up with rationalizations to get around these facts. You see things like "greeting display" and "domination behavior" thrown around to describe what two animals who live and hunt together all their lives are doing... and you see the "Well, this poor animal is just confused." attitude... nevermind that the one thing an animal is not likely to be confused about is sex. Just because -we- can't tell a boy penguin from a girl penguin doesn't mean they can't. About the only things you got uncontestably right in your post is that yes, people have the right to not like gays and to express that dislike (the right to act out upon that dislike is limited by the rights of gays... the old saying "Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins." applies here. You [spoken generically] can hate somebody because they're gay; you can cannot hit somebody because they are gay.) Yes, people have every right to dislike an important part of the natural balance of the world. Yes, you have every right to believe even in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary that homosexuality is not natural. Yes, you have every right to believe in the total absence of supporting evidence that homosexuality is not right. You, like everybody else, have every right to your opinion. However, I've never quite grasped why people are so keen on defending their opinion as an opinion. The right to an opinion is nothing special. Opinions themselves are nothing special. Opinions are flawed specimens. :P We need to be able to hold them... in the absence of firm facts... but if you cling too tightly to them instead of learning when contrary information comes along, what was meant to be a stepping stone ends up just weighing you down. | |
no matter how you put it, homosexuality is not natural. if it was then men would be able to get pregnant by having sex with other men and women would be able to get pregnant by having sex with other women.
| |
Given that every example that was stated occurs in nature, I would disagree with your assertion that homosexual behavior is not natural. True, it does not produce offspring, but so what? Are you then also arguing that the only legitimate intimate contact is one that bears offspring? Or do you then claim that incest (which can produce offspring) is somehow superior to same sex relations? (Actually, you would not be the first to make such an asinine case, see the writings of Thomas Aquinas).
| |
Jmurph wrote:
Given that every example that was stated occurs in nature, I would disagree with your assertion that homosexual behavior is not natural. True, it does not produce offspring, but so what? The purpose of sex is to yield offspring - that's inarguable. The roots of it as are of yet unknown, but there's a chance it could be a mental disorder. In such a case, it could be said that having schizophrenia is normal, because it occurs in nature. Are you then also arguing that the only legitimate intimate contact is one that bears offspring? It depends what you mean by "legitimate." It certainly benefits the species much more if you yield offspring. As I said earlier, the core purpose of sex is to reproduce - not to generate pleasure. I don't think homosexuality is as horrible as people make it out to be, but it's definitely not the intended use of sex. Or do you then claim that incest (which can produce offspring) is somehow superior to same sex relations? (On a personal note, I think that's a bit too accusatory; it would have been better phrased as a calm question as opposed to an attack, for example, "Do you believe that incest is superior to same sex relations because it can yield offspring?") I personally think that neither is superior to the other, because both are abnormal (regardless of being found in nature). I'm not one to go around yelling, "OMFG U STOOPED QUEER," but I still don't believe that homosexuality is normal. I don't have any real problem with it at all, however, until people start claiming that it *is* normal. | |
Please do not tell me what I would and would not do with evidence. I have yet to see anyone back up their claims by truely doing this, bringing up real research that puts forth statistical facts in this manner. If you have it, I would try to find the time to read it and come to a rational conclusion.
And please do not insult my intelligence by saying that I believe something against supposed mountains of evidence until you have shown the evidence and let me yet disbelieve without at least attempting to disprove it. | |