|
Is homosexuality natural?
|
|
| eboyd |
Date: Saturday, 28/Nov/09, 12:44 PM | Message # 16 |
Heads
Posts: 13145
|
Quote (Adam) OMG erik your message count!!!  
my new theme song
erikboyd60@hotmail.com
"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"
-T.S. Eliot
battle record:
7-0-0
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Saturday, 28/Nov/09, 7:00 PM | Message # 17 |
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Quote (eboyd) we had this exact discussion a few weeks ago and this was my exact argument. I_Guy took more of a "spectrum of what is natural" approach, Menace took a "natural is what exists before human intervention" approach with chinita and others agreeing with him, and bacon took more of a "it depends on how you decide to define it" which technically would have been the correct way to look at it, but how he put it made it seem as if you can define a word however you want, which i find to be absurd. it all came down to us coming to different conclusions of the meaning of "natural" because we were all referring to different, equally valid definitions of the same word. my argument was that, in the way it was being used in the initial comment and considering the recent multitude of knowledge/political threads on the subjects of cosmology and philosophy, that this definition of the word "natural" was the relevant one in that particular thread. in this thread, however, my above post has bolded the correct definition of the word in the context it is being used.
Imagine if we had a language that didn't have these problems. <_< Quote (J-Breakz) And you can say that everything is natural, what exactlyt can't be natural?
Quote (J-Breakz) I don't think you can answer what isn't natural because everything in the universe is natural. It's impossible to create something that isn't natural because you use resources that are given to you naturally. And if it is possible than it would proabably violate the whole energy cannot be created law...
You asked, "what can't be natural?" There is no way to answer that. I can't say "nothing." Because that would be saying, "Nothing can't be natural." Does that really make sense?
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Saturday, 28/Nov/09, 7:14 PM | Message # 18 |
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (I_Guy)
You asked, "what can't be natural?" There is no way to answer that. I can't say "nothing." Because that would be saying, "Nothing can't be natural." Does that really make sense?
nothing can't be natural therefore everything is natural.
livin life like some cheesy movie
Message edited by J-Breakz - Saturday, 28/Nov/09, 7:14 PM
|
|
|
|
| eboyd |
Date: Saturday, 28/Nov/09, 7:26 PM | Message # 19 |
|
Heads
Posts: 13145
|
Quote (I_Guy) Imagine if we had a language that didn't have these problems. <_< haha yeah i feel you on that Quote (J-Breakz) nothing can't be natural therefore everything is natural. how about "everything is natural, therefore nothing non-natural exists"?
my new theme song
erikboyd60@hotmail.com
"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"
-T.S. Eliot
battle record:
7-0-0
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Saturday, 28/Nov/09, 8:07 PM | Message # 20 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (eboyd) "everything is natural, therefore nothing non-natural exists"
yeah that is much clearer.
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
| s0dr2 |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 3:37 PM | Message # 21 |
OGs
Posts: 2772
|
Quote (eboyd) how about "everything is natural, therefore nothing non-natural exists"?
is pedophilia natural?
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbour. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." - Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
| YANHAP1 |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 3:45 PM | Message # 22 |
DJs
Posts: 337
|
who killed bambi? 
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 4:06 PM | Message # 23 |
|
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Quote (sodr2) is pedophilia natural?
By this logic here, yes. But it is unacceptable when the child doesn't want it, because at that point it is either molestation or rape.
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| eboyd |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 5:37 PM | Message # 24 |
|
Heads
Posts: 13145
|
It depends, as I said before, on the definition of natural you are using. By the definition referring to everything that exists as natural, then the concept of pedophilia is natural as it can be referred to as a thing. If we can place "it" in front of it, it exists and is therefore a THING that EXISTS is natural. It doesn't have to be a tangible thing either. That doesn't mean that what the concept is describing is natural by extension, however. This is the mistake that is commonly made in the TAG (transcendental argument for the existence of God) argument. A concept exists, and therefore it is natural. However, does that which the concept is describing exist? We have a concept of unicorns, big foot, the Lock Ness Monster, little green aliens, Santa Claus, flying reindeer, and of course, the inevitable here, God, and I would contest that none of them exist because of lack of proof. When it comes to homosexuality and pedophilia, these are in a different category. Now the question is, are they THINGS? The definition we are using here for natural is "everyTHING that exists", so that way, anything that fits the category of "natural" needs to meet two criteria: it needs to be a thing and it needs to exist. Pedophilia and homosexuality, past their concepts, are not things. They exist as mindstates and sexual behavior, which are verbs, and as they are not nouns, though they exist, they are not natural. However, this is not the correct definition of natural to use when describing such things as pedophilia and homosexuality. A more appropriate definition would be the one I bolded on the first page: "the biological functions or the urges to satisfy their requirements." By this definition, if you have an urge to satisfy a lustful feeling of children (people that have yet to fully go through puberty) or people you perceive to be children, then that urge can be defined as pedophilia and therefore pedophilia is natural. However, if you choose to rape children out of malice, even though it disgusts you, that is a form of pedophilia that is not natural.
my new theme song
erikboyd60@hotmail.com
"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"
-T.S. Eliot
battle record:
7-0-0
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 5:42 PM | Message # 25 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (eboyd) However, if you choose to rape children out of malice, even though it disgusts you, that is a form of pedophilia that is not natural.
whoa, over thinking this... how is that not natural? It has been shown that even different animals have raped each other. When a person rapes another they are doing it to satisfy their urges and using force to do so. These are natural things that the person could not control.
livin life like some cheesy movie
Message edited by J-Breakz - Friday, 04/Dec/09, 5:43 PM
|
|
|
|
| s0dr2 |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 5:47 PM | Message # 26 |
|
OGs
Posts: 2772
|
Quote (eboyd) If we can place "it" in front of it, it exists and is therefore a THING that EXISTS is natural.
Is a machine natural? Quote (eboyd) "the biological functions or the urges to satisfy their requirements." By this definition, if you have an urge to satisfy a lustful feeling of children (people that have yet to fully go through puberty) or people you perceive to be children, then that urge can be defined as pedophilia and therefore pedophilia is natural. However, if you choose to rape children out of malice, even though it disgusts you, that is a form of pedophilia that is not natural.
but doesnt raping children (for some people) an urge that satisfies? i mean why else would they be doing it
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbour. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." - Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 5:48 PM | Message # 27 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (sodr2) Is a machine natural?
It's made of resources that come from the Earth, so yes.
livin life like some cheesy movie
Message edited by J-Breakz - Friday, 04/Dec/09, 5:48 PM
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 6:51 PM | Message # 28 |
|
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Pedophilia is induced by nature so yes. Quote (sodr2) Is a machine natural?
We've already discussed this. Yes it is. It has been produced by natural processes that nature has induced Now is it cosmically normal? NO. Is it usual? NO. Is it common? NO. All things created are cosmically abnormal and unusual and uncommon. Is a machine original? NO. People often get all of these confused. Its funny, we tend to think that everything that precedes us is natural. I also think we tend to think that things are natural only if a mindless unconscious force produces it by natural laws.
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| eboyd |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 7:17 PM | Message # 29 |
|
Heads
Posts: 13145
|
Quote (J-Breakz) whoa, over thinking this... how is that not natural? It has been shown that even different animals have raped each other. When a person rapes another they are doing it to satisfy their urges and using force to do so. These are natural things that the person could not control. I was speaking of something that is hypothetical. Imagine a person that is grossed out even by the thought of having sex with a child but goes against his/her nature and did it anyways. That would be unnatural. Quote (sodr) but doesnt raping children (for some people) an urge that satisfies? i mean why else would they be doing it As I said before, if someone followed urges to partake in sexual acts with children, that is pedophilia. The better question for me is, what constitutes childhood? I'd say a child is someone who hasn't fully or almost fully gone through puberty. People will probably disagree with this. I think it is wrong, however, to label someone a pedophiliac for partaking in sexual acts with a 16 or 17 year old who is very mature for her age. Look at Akon. He was dancing with that 14 year old girl. She looked at least 18. I know someone who was 22 who had sex with a 14 year old thinking she was 18 (showed him a fake ID). Luckily he never got caught though. Quote (I_Guy) Pedophilia is induced by nature so yes. Again, that's the wrong definition. Is pedophilia caused naturally within the human body? Yes. Then it's natural.
my new theme song
erikboyd60@hotmail.com
"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"
-T.S. Eliot
battle record:
7-0-0
|
|
|
|
| eboyd |
Date: Friday, 04/Dec/09, 7:22 PM | Message # 30 |
|
Heads
Posts: 13145
|
Quote (I_Guy) Its funny, we tend to think that everything that precedes us is natural. How are they not??? Quote (I_Guy) I also think we tend to think that things are natural only if a mindless unconscious force produces it by natural laws. Everything is natural, and anything that isn't natural doesn't exist.
my new theme song
erikboyd60@hotmail.com
"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"
-T.S. Eliot
battle record:
7-0-0
|
|
|
|
