Can anyone provide a logically sound argument as to why homosexuality is "wrong"?

[otisthebat]

Primates are pretty smart. They dont have the capability to speak, but they are definitely trainable to make it appear consent is given.

Point is, there is no logical argument against Beastiality or Homosexuality. Its ALL MORALS.
I repeat, ITS ALL MORALS. (some of you cant seem to get that)

homosexual humans can give unmistaken verbal or physical consent.

animals can not. youre really reaching for straws with your primate training argument. anyway, this thread isnt about bestiality.

[markymark69]

I will start out by saying "because my holy book says so" is not a logically sound argument.

I have seen many people say that they feel homosexuality is "just wrong", but have never heard any present a logically sound explanation.

In my opinion, homosexuality is not wrong, because it hurts no one, and has no negative impact on anyone other than any impact resulting from discrimination.

I'm curious to hear what people have to say.

Easy... it will lead to ****philia, socialism and communism. And I believe it somehow leads to the brainwashing of our children in public schools (at least that what I was told in Maine)

[AKR]

U mad im bringing the homosexuality into context?

U mad you don't actually have a valid, relevant argument?

Children can give consent. Have you ever watched TO Catch a Predator? People go to prison all the time because of ********.

Informed consent? No.

I'm not replying on this side topic anymore. Get on topic or get out.

[Whoda]

homosexual humans can give unmistaken verbal or physical consent.

animals can not. youre really reaching for straws with your primate training argument. anyway, this thread isnt about bestiality.

its about the same principles of right and wrong.

primates are smart as hell. they could be trained to give "consent", and it would hold up in court.

How about necrophilia. Since there is no consent needed, if enough people start doing it, it will be considered socially acceptable just like homosexuality. By your "logical" argument, we should be able to practice necrophilia, right?

[otisthebat]

its about the same principles of right and wrong.

primates are smart as hell. they could be trained to give "consent", and it would hold up in court.

How about necrophilia. Since there is no consent needed, if enough people start doing it, it will be considered socially acceptable just like homosexuality. By your "logical" argument, we should be able to practice necrophilia, right?

this thread is about homosexuality. as AKR said, get on topic or get out.

[AKR]

its about the same principles of right and wrong.

primates are smart as hell. they could be trained to give "consent", and it would hold up in court.

How about necrophilia. Since there is no consent needed, if enough people start doing it, it will be considered socially acceptable just like homosexuality. By your "logical" argument, we should be able to practice necrophilia, right?

Your method of argument is not working. You're trying to use a method of questioning on what you think is a similar situation but you're not comprehending that it is not the same, which is part of why you will never get us to argue against our own argument. The only reason we think beastiality is wrong is because of consent. So, I have no idea where you think you're going with this. Our reasoning for being against beastiality has nothing to do with homosexuality.

If you even actually have a "logical" reason as to why homosexuality is wrong, you should try a direct method, because your plan of attack is seriously flawed.

[Katimba]

It depends what you define as "wrong"

sexual intercourse procedure
dick in pussy = correct
dick in ass = wrong hole, incorrect

is it morally wrong?
tis everybodys own opinion, let them do what they please, its their bodies.

just stay the **** away from me with **** and i could care less.

[Whoda]

this thread is about homosexuality. as AKR said, get on topic or get out.

im making my argument against homosexuality.

why is homosexuality considered socially acceptable but necrophilia is not?

[GrokTheCube]

its about the same principles of right and wrong.

primates are smart as hell. they could be trained to give "consent", and it would hold up in court.

How about necrophilia. Since there is no consent needed, if enough people start doing it, it will be considered socially acceptable just like homosexuality. By your "logical" argument, we should be able to practice necrophilia, right?

Are you trying to construct a slippery slope argument?

If so, it is not logically sound. Slippery slope is a formal fallacy, meaning any argument based upon it is always logically unsound. Please come up with a logically sound argument, or admit that there is not one, and thus that homosexuality is not wrong

If that is not what you are trying to start a discussion about another issue, I'd kindly ask you to stop the off topic posts, and make your own thread if you'd like to talk about bestiality.

[Harbinger]

its about the same principles of right and wrong.

primates are smart as hell. they could be trained to give "consent", and it would hold up in court.

How about necrophilia. Since there is no consent needed, if enough people start doing it, it will be considered socially acceptable just like homosexuality. By your "logical" argument, we should be able to practice necrophilia, right?

[Whoda]

you atheists can call me a troll, i dont care. Point is, your hatin and getting flustered becaues you cant make a point and im putting my arguments into context

[GrokTheCube]

im making my argument against homosexuality.

why is homosexuality considered socially acceptable but necrophilia is not?

Ahh, it is a slippery slope argumet.

In that case, it is logically invalid by default.

Can you construct a logically sound argument? If the answer is no, that's ok. I've never heard one before.

[otisthebat]

you atheists can call me a troll, i dont care. Point is, your hatin and getting flustered becaues you cant make a point and im putting my arguments into context

stop derailing the thread with your nonsense.

[Whoda]

Are you trying to construct a slippery slope argument?

If so, it is not logically sound. Slippery slope is a formal fallacy, meaning any argument based upon it is always logically unsound. Please come up with a logically sound argument, or admit that there is not one, and thus that homosexuality is not wrong
If that is not what you are trying to start a discussion about another issue, I'd kindly ask you to stop the off topic posts, and make your own thread if you'd like to talk about bestiality.

Come up with a logically sound argument about why necrophilia is wrong, or admit that there is not one, and thus necrophilia is not wrong.

These questions ive been asking is in the same ballpark.

[BTI]

im making my argument against homosexuality.

why is homosexuality considered socially acceptable but necrophilia is not?

You still don't get it.

You need to provide a logical argument for why homosexuality is wrong. Trying to tie it with zoophilia or necrophilia is a terrible approach because homosexuality is in no way related.

I repeat what others have said: Get on topic or get out.

[Whoda]

Ahh, it is a slippery slope argumet.

In that case, it is logically invalid by default.

Can you construct a logically sound argument? If the answer is no, that's ok. I've never heard one before.

Construct a logically sound argument against necrophilia or beastiality.

[StarScream_F22]

Whoda has a point, if more and more people started to participate in necrophelia it will eventually become the norm just like homosexuality has.

I don't think either side can come to an agreement since it depends on your own opinion and definition of wrong.

[otisthebat]

Construct a logically sound argument against necrophilia or beastiality.

negged.

[Harbinger]

you atheists can call me a troll, i dont care. Point is, your hatin and getting flustered becaues you cant make a point and im putting my arguments into context

We get flustered because arguing with you is like arguing with a box of hammers. No matter how many times it's explained to you to get on topic, you just don't seem to understand.

[Whoda]

You still don't get it.

You need to provide a logical argument for why homosexuality is wrong. Trying to tie it with zoophilia or necrophilia is a terrible approach because homosexuality is in no way related.

I repeat what others have said: Get on topic or get out.

it is related. 40 years ago, homosexuality was deemed socially unacceptable.

Whats to say that in twenty years, if more and more people start practicing beastiality and necrophilia, that these two will be considered socially acceptable.

One argument, is that there HIV/AIDS is prevelant in the gay community. Some of these gays are bi. A disease, which we have no cure for, is being spread around from the gay community to the straight community, how is this fair to the straight people?

[BTI]

Construct a logically sound argument against necrophilia or beastiality.

Start your own thread about these topics.

In this thread you are supposed to argue why homosexuality is wrong.

You have failed to do so.

[AKR]

Whoda has a point, if more and more people started to participate in necrophelia it will eventually become the norm just like homosexuality has.

I don't think either side can come to an agreement since it depends on your own opinion and definition of wrong.

No point. Why shouldn't it become the norm? And who says it will? Only a certain percentage of the population is gay. Why would that increase?

[Whoda]

No point. Why shouldn't it become the norm? And who says it will? Only a certain percentage of the population is gay. Why would that increase?

That population has been increasing every year for years

[AKR]

it is related. 40 years ago, homosexuality was deemed socially unacceptable.

Whats to say that in twenty years, if more and more people start practicing beastiality and necrophilia, that these two will be considered socially acceptable.

One argument, is that there HIV/AIDS is prevelant in the gay community. Some of these gays are bi. A disease, which we have no cure for, is being spread around from the gay community to the straight community, how is this fair to the straight people?

Slippery fail. Same argument can be used against heterosexuality. First, you're having sex with females, next thing you know, you'll be having sex with dead chickens.

[litle_dan]

what about the people that dont believe any of that happened?

well just look at a generation above then and higher... they have both a mother and father.. so why should they be different. they should fulfill one of those roles and look for a match in which they are not. ie if ur a male be a dad and search for the mom ... dont try to change things that have been working and look for another man.. its gross like fuck off srs.. its a hotdog per bun.. not 2 hotdogs together.. get use to it.

[Harbinger]

That population has been increasing every year for years

I believe they are just 'coming out' they are probably not reproducing.

[AKR]

That population has been increasing every year for years

Proof? The number of people out of the closet has increased due to the social stigma being lessened. It doesn't mean more people are actually gay or bi. Even if they were, what would this matter? Look at other species. It's not destroying them. Our closest relatives are most bisexual. Bonobos are one big sex fest. It works for them.

[canuckinfuts]

I will start out by saying "because my holy book says so" is not a logically sound argument.

I have seen many people say that they feel homosexuality is "just wrong", but have never heard any present a logically sound explanation.

In my opinion, homosexuality is not wrong, because it hurts no one, and has no negative impact on anyone other than any impact resulting from discrimination.

I'm curious to hear what people have to say.

Stick it in whatever you want as long as the other party agrees and is old enough/mentally capable of concenting. Only problem I have is when they want to make a mockery of marriage.

[GrokTheCube]

Construct a logically sound argument against necrophilia or beastiality.

Going to play logic 101 for a moment. What we have here is a blatant non sequitur.

Your argument strucure is:

I believe A and B to be wrong.
My opponent believes A to be wrong.
Therefore, my opponent must also concede that B is wrong.

I really think youre just trolling at this point.

[Harbinger]

Stick it in whatever you want as long as the other party agrees and is old enough/mentally capable of concenting. Only problem I have is when they want to make a mockery of marriage.

what exactly is a "mockery of marriage"?