Is it natural??

Exactly! Very well said!

 

Gay penguins, too!!!

 

i second that.

 

Here's another thought: what if it isn't "natural"? Is that such a bad thing?

Air conditioning isn't natural, but it's supposed to get up to 91 degrees here this afternoon. I'm not going to refuse to sit in an air-conditioned place just because it isn't natural?

Lots of life-saving medicines and medical treatments aren't "natural," but I haven't heard of anyone arguing against them for that reason.

I could probably go on and on, but my point is that "natural" doesn't matter in some things.

 

I think being gay is natural- we are all just following our hearts. Gay people love people of the same sex, but its still LOVE, and nothing more or less. It's just as pure (if not MORE) than heterosexual love.

 

Homos
are great
for Promos.

(sorry, just trying a little rhyme here)

 

what may be natural to one person might be unnatural to another. If you and your buddies want to say it's unnatural than that's your right, but us gays can just as easily say that being straight is unnatural.

 

two boys fit together just fine

 

It's seen as unnatural because gay sex doesn't result in a child. I think this is all bollocks and that if the object of desire can consent willingly, then go for it (this means animal sex is off, since when does an animal say 'fuck me please'?)

 

once i went to the pet store and i swear i heard a parrot squawk, "fuck me please!"

 

Mine said a lot more than just that. .........The son of bitch flew away. "i forgot to clip his wing that month".

 

Actually Vimmy you're not quite right there at all, from the Texan man who shot his poodle for being gay to a pair of penguins in Kelly Tarlton's Underwater World you'll find homosexuality and bisexuality have been documented in most animals, including pair-bonding mating couples.

This book is also interesting, if somewhat disputable in parts.

As to the actual topic itself, I put it this way on another site I frequent:

"...homosexuality tends to blossom, well, everywhere. From toads to tigers. Design wise: It is entirely possible that it serves absolutely no purpose and that it just happens to be a rather stubborn mutation - or there are a plethora of theories as to why homosexuality might be beneficial to the continuation of species; a very popular and entirely possible one is that a community with more non-breeding/non-maternal adults [potential hunters/gathers/protectors/nannies (if you will)] has a better chance than an entire community dedicated only to reproduction. Common evolutionary theory allows for such a scenario quite happily, provided that the homosexuality trait only occurs via a less common arrangement of alleles.

Of course that is merely one potential explanation, but it and others like it immediately refute your insistence that homosexuality is a useless appendage dangling to the shoulders of heterosexuality."

I dunno, I'm probably sounding a little dogmatic, but I just don't see why people assume the negative without having any good reason to whatsoever. It's weird prejudice.

 

Cute theory Blackie, but it just doesn't sit well with me. I believe people can BE bisexual as an action if they open their minds, but I sure as hell have a homosexual "core-sexuality" - women just aren't exciting the way men are, sex with them would be like sex with a sex toy, not a lover.

 

But a human cock would never fit anyway.... *giggles*

 

The Sacred Band of Thebes (in ancient Greek ἱερὸς λόχος / hieròs lókhos) was an elite Greek troop of 150 pairs of pederastic lovers, according to Plutarch (in the Life of Pelopidas) formed by the Theban commander Gorgidas. The pairs consisted of the older heniochoi, charioteers, and the younger paraibatai, companions. The motivation for the use of such an "Army of Lovers" in battle is also stated by Plutarch:

"For men of the same tribe or family little value one another when dangers press; but a band cemented by friendship grounded upon love is never to be broken, and invincible; since the lovers, ashamed to be base in sight of their beloved, and the beloved before their lovers, willingly rush into danger for the relief of one another." According to Plutarch, Gorgidas initially distributed the Sacred Band of Thebes throughout his battle lines as an elite to strengthen the others' resolve, but later Pelopidas, after the Band had fought successfully at Tegyrae, used it as a sort of personal guard. For about 33 years, the Sacred Band of Thebes remained an important part of the Greek infantry.

Its defeat came at the Battle of Chaeronea, the decisive battle in which Philip II of Macedon and his son Alexander the Great ended the independence of the Greek city-states. Philip had been held as a hostage in Thebes, and had learned his military tactics there. The remainder of the Theban army fled when faced with the overwhelming forces of Philip and Alexander, but the Sacred Band, surrounded, held their ground and fell where they stood. Plutarch recounts that upon encountering their corpses heaped together and understanding who they were he exclaimed:

"Perish any man who suspects that these men either did or suffered anything unseemly." Though Plutarch claims that all three hundred died that day, other writers claim that two hundred and fifty four died and all the rest were wounded. That claim was substantiated upon the excavation of their communal grave at Chaeronea, in which two hundred and fifty four skeletons were found, arranged in seven rows.

 

Memorial to the Sacred Band of Thebes at Chaeronea, marking the communal grave (πολυανδρειον / polyandreîon) in which they were buried. Philip II of Macedon erected the tribute to commemorate the bravery of the conquered batallion.

The Sacred Band of Thebes (in ancient Greek ἱερὸς λόχος / hieròs lókhos) was an elite Greek troop of 150 pairs of pederastic lovers, according to Plutarch (in the Life of Pelopidas) formed by the Theban commander Gorgidas. The pairs consisted of the older

 

FAMOUS "HOMOSEXUALS" As Alfred C. Kinsey has pointed out, it is problematical to use the word "homosexual" to describe a person. Such labeling is often arbitrary and over-broad. Especially in the United States today many people have unrealistic ideas about what "homosexuals" are or how they behave. However, throughout history a great number of men and women (many of them quite famous) have felt sexually attracted to members of their own sex either occasionally or frequently, or even exclusively. Some acted upon this feeling and were openly proud of it; others suppressed it and led very unhappy lives. Many were even persecuted by their contemporaries and came to a tragic end. The above portrait gallery shows some historical personalities who are known to have had strong homosexual leanings. Obviously, this list is not meant to prove that such leanings make people in any way superior. Still, it can perhaps help to counteract certain false current stereotypes.

 

Plato wrote about the code of honor of the Sacred Band of Thebes:

"The beloved, when he is found in any disgraceful situation, will be pained at being detected by his lover. If there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army should be made up of lovers and their loves, they would be the very best governors of their own city, abstaining from all dishonour... For what lover would not choose rather to be seen by all mankind than by his beloved, either when abandoning his post or throwing away his arms... Or who would desert his beloved or fail him in the hour of danger?"
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Band_of_Thebes"

 

Ya, it's natural. Differences like homosexuality is what will make the world a better place.

 

YES!