Homos

[neoplacebo]

I seem to recall that there's at least one living organism that is asexual and needs no partner to reproduce. I forget what the thing is, but I never considered it anything other than normal, just because it exists. I would actually call it self sufficient, self fulfilling.....normal. Actually, that's better than normal.

There are quite a few - many that you'd recognize, like jellyfish. But the real story is the Komodo Dragon. "Female Komodo dragons (the largest lizard) can produce offspring by parthenogenesis when no male is available for sexual reproduction. Their offspring are homozygous at every locus including having identical sex chromosomes. Thus the females produce all males because, unlike mammals, females are the heterogametic sex (ZW) while males are homogametic (ZZ)."

I suppose we can all consider ourselves lucky since we have XX or XY chromosomes; otherwise we'd all be lizards without partners, or jellyfish aimlessly drifting on silent seas.

[Mr.B]

"I've said all along that homosexuality is not a normal trait in humans; thanks, you've confirmed it".

"Well, see Mr.B, that's where you get it demonstrably wrong.......you're not entitled to your own facts and you don't define "normality" for everyone else."

Well now, let's take a look at how wrong I am.....

In Biology, I learned that a male's penis is for eliminating the body's fluid wastes and also for sexual pleasure when mated to a person designed/created to receive the penis; and can cause reproduction when inserted into the female vagina. His anus is solely for the elimination of solid bodily wastes. What is "normal" or even "demonstrably wrong" when a man inserts his liquid waste eliminator into the solid waste elimination orifice of another male?

I also learned that the female vagina was designed/created in a two-fold manner as well; one orifice for eliminating bodily fluid wastes, and the other orifice for receiving the penis of the opposite sex for pleasure or reproduction. Her mammaries (breasts) were designed primarily for feeding her infant(s), same as females do in other mammal groups. In addition, they are pleasurable for her mate or lover.

What is "normal" or even "demonstrably wrong" when another female inserts her mouth organ that is designed/created as one of the body's senses to taste food, onto the vagina of another female?

Mankind is not a jellyfish, lizard, monkey, or any other lower species of animal, asexual or otherwise; he/she was created, evolved, or however you want to believe, to be a superior life-form and is supposed to be of a higher intelligence than any life form of the animal kingdom.

Male/male, female/female, man/boy, man/girl, woman/boy, and woman/girl desires are purely perversions driven by an insatiable, animalistic lust that puts those involved in such relationships in a level lower than the lowest of animals.

I can't understand why there are those who claim no such desires, want to condone and promote these deviant lifestyles....yet call those who openly oppose it closet homosexuals, latent homosexuals, etc. Perhaps those who condone and promote these deviant lifestyles are really the closet jobs?

[JTA]

You all got Mr. B teaching us sex-ed. This thread has gotten out of control.

[O Really]

You all got Mr. B teaching us sex-ed. This thread has gotten out of control.

Yeah, well at the approximate age I guess Mr.B to be, I don't believe he got human sexuality training in a Biology class. And if he did, and this is really what was taught, it seems to have a definite PG rating about it. You suppose in all his years he hasn't learned more than that by now?

[bannination]

You all got Mr. B teaching us sex-ed. This thread has gotten out of control.

Yeah, definitely makes you double think the "no censorship" policy. I'm just thankful the females in our species don't bite/rip the head off after coitus or (gulp) mid-coitus.

[Mr.B]

"Yeah, well at the approximate age I guess Mr.B to be, I don't believe he got human sexuality training in a Biology class......You suppose in all his years he hasn't learned more than that by now?"

What O Really meant to say: "Yeah, well at the approximate age I guess Mr.B to be, I don't believe he got lower animal sexuality training in a Biology class.

I've got enough education to know the difference in humans and lower animals; pity the liberal world thinks all life should be equal in nature.
I know this means nothing to you, but here it is:

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,
and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

[O Really]

The animals were a side trip, Mr.B. But somewhere along the line you should have learned there's a lot more to human sexuality other than insert tab A into slot B.

[O Really]

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,
and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.[/color]

I'm not sure who the "us" is - seriously - but you do realize that if " ... in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them" that by necessity God has to be both male and female, right?

[Sometime Lefty]

Is it "normal" or "demonstrably wrong" when a male inserts his mouth organ that is designed/created as one of the body's senses to taste food, onto the vagina of a female? Or vice versa? Is oral sex a perversion for a married couple in Mr B's world?

[Mr.B]

"Is oral sex a perversion for a married couple...."
I dunno...you tell us.

".....in Mr B's world?"
What is or isn't in my world is none of your business. I will say that my wife is female, not some hairy-legged, bearded wearer of Fruit-of-The Looms.

[Mr.B]

"I'm not sure who the "us" is......"
No surprise there.

"......seriously - but you do realize that if " ... in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them" that by necessity God has to be both male and female, right?
No surprise you're ignorant on that fact as well.

"The animals were a side trip, Mr.B. But somewhere along the line you should have learned there's a lot more to human sexuality other than insert tab A into slot B."
Oh, I know....I've already mentioned it. It's called perverted lust. Lust doesn't always involve copulation; there are those who prefer self-gratification by watching or performing masochism or other heinous actions.

[O Really]

So enlighten us from our ignorance, please. Inquiring minds want to know.

[neoplacebo]

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,
and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.[/color]

I'm not sure who the "us" is - seriously - but you do realize that if " ... in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them" that by necessity God has to be both male and female, right?

I think what really happened is that man said let us make god in our own image, after our likeness; and let him have dominion over....the earth. In this way, the early "priests" could maintain their power and control over the commoners. Back in the day, pretty much the only people that could read and write were priests. This conveyed a certain amount of power over those who couldn't read; it was like magic to them. The "church" has historically been very much against any advances in art, science, knowledge.......anything that questioned what the "church" considered to be correct. in fact, the "church" would condemn to death any such naysayer who believed other than what was supposed to be believed. It's the same today to a lesser extent. Amen.

[Sometime Lefty]

"Is oral sex a perversion for a married couple...."
I dunno...you tell us.

".....in Mr B's world?"
What is or isn't in my world is none of your business. I will say that my wife is female, not some hairy-legged, bearded wearer of Fruit-of-The Looms.

I'm asking you is oral sex a perversion for a married couple? I don't care if you do it or not, is it a "perversion"?

[Mr.B]

"I'm asking you is oral sex a perversion for a married couple? I don't care if you do it or not, is it a "perversion"?

It's your fantasy.....I dunno...you tell us.

[Mr.B]

Mr.B
"Sub-Lieutenant" ...... :-0?>

What's a Sub-Lieutenant?
I was an Ensign; the next rank up would be Lieutenant j.g, then full Lieutenant....

Is a Sub-Lieutenant a Lieutenant on a submarine???

[neoplacebo]

I say no, it isn't a perversion; in fact, it's thought of by many as a blessing or at least a treat.

[neoplacebo]

Mr.B
"Sub-Lieutenant" ...... :-0?>

What's a Sub-Lieutenant?
I was an Ensign; the next rank up would be Lieutenant j.g, then full Lieutenant....

Is a Sub-Lieutenant a Lieutenant on a submarine???

I figure a sub lieutenant is anyone with a rank less than lieutenant such as lieutenant jg or ensign. I always thought Ensign was a stupid name for a rank; an ensign is a flag. I myself quit the Navy after four years. It was evident to me that they weren't going to promote me to Admiral. I only got to E-5 which is on the list of ranks under Sub Lieutenant. Here I'm a flag but once held a higher rank and still don't know how I went off the reservation.......Banni, can I please be an Admiral?

[bannination]

Mr.B
"Sub-Lieutenant" ...... :-0?>

What's a Sub-Lieutenant?
I was an Ensign; the next rank up would be Lieutenant j.g, then full Lieutenant....

Is a Sub-Lieutenant a Lieutenant on a submarine???

Oh quit your whining at least you're a commissioned officer now.

[neoplacebo]

Glory glory. Admiralty is my domain at last.Makes me swell with pride. Anchors aweigh, swabbies. Stand by to get underway. I'll decide later where we go. Meanwhile, I will retire to my stateroom.