Perverted Penguins

[Nerfherder]

Do the penguins even know if something is dead?

They have a mating ritual.... you would think that if the other party did not respond they might give up

 

[STS]

So if they have a preference over the same sex then it goes beyond just wanting "hanky panky" as you put it.

Strawman

tell me why it is a strawman. dog smells a bitch is on heat, he goes after his male compadre in the same garden as him to get his frustrations out. it's more than just a choice, it's a reaction to hormones as well. a female pigeon splattered and on the side of the road provides no resistance to a male pigeon and he goes for it, not becuse he prefers it that way, but it is a form of release for him.

every animal has preferences. animals will prefer certain foods, certain activities, certain actions, but like people do we let Bob our homosexual friend keep his label because he is humping every lady in the neighbourhood too? despite his protests that he is really gay as he prefers men more even though he is already getting dressed and packing condoms for his date with Sally?

animals are animals, people are people. we're separate for a reason

 

[Unhappy438]

tell me why it is a strawman.

I was referring to your second point as strawman.

dog smells a bitch is on heat, he goes after his male compadre in the same garden as him to get his frustrations out.

In this case the dog doesn't have a choice as he cant get to the female.

it's more than just a choice, it's a reaction to hormones as well. a female pigeon splattered and on the side of the road provides no resistance to a male pigeon and he goes for it, not becuse he prefers it that way, but it is a form of release for him.

You think humans are different in this case how?

every animal has preferences. animals will prefer certain foods, certain activities, certain actions

Yes exactly and some animals prefer the same sex over the opposite sex.

But like people do we let Bob our homosexual friend keep his label because he is humping every lady in the neighbourhood too? despite his protests that he is really gay as he prefers men more even though he is already getting dressed and packing condoms for his date with Sally?

Hes bisexual and this is different to my original point, as i said animal gets put together with same sex and opposite sex animal. Chooses to only mate with same sex animal not both.

animals are animals, people are people. we're separate for a reason

No we're not seperate, humans are animals. The fact that you think differently shows how out of touch you are with reality.

 

[Swa]

So what about all of the homosexual birds, fish, bears, tigers (the list can go on) who are not part of packs?

Did you just ignore everything I said? It's not solely about packs. It's packs, herds and populations. Animals go for whatever they can get when hormones are ruling. The choice is always there but it's not always practical because of "ownership", maturity, monogamy, and possibly a whole range of other stuff.

Claiming equal opportunity just because there are other females is terribly short sighted. Bringing nematodes into it just confused things. I doubt they even know what sex is let alone that it's for copulation. Sounds a lot like someone driving a bunch of lemmings to disorientation and then claiming lemmings are inclined to jump off cliffs.

They have a mating ritual.... you would think that if the other party did not respond they might give up

Animals tend to take no response and even a no to mean yes. Just like some people but real animals actually have a valid excuse.

No we're not seperate, humans are animals. The fact that you think differently shows how out of touch you are with reality.

Thinking we are alike is being out of touch with reality. We are a lot different. Animals act on instinct while we can rationalise.

 

[buyeye]

I was referring to your second point as strawman.



In this case the dog doesn't have a choice as he cant get to the female.



You think humans are different in this case how?



Yes exactly and some animals prefer the same sex over the opposite sex.



Hes bisexual and this is different to my original point, as i said animal gets put together with same sex and opposite sex animal. Chooses to only mate with same sex animal not both.



No we're not seperate, humans are animals. The fact that you think differently shows how out of touch you are with reality.

I am suprised at the number of homosexual necrophiliacs on the forum.

 

[copacetic]

I am suprised at the number of homosexual necrophiliacs on the forum.

This is the internet, what did you expect? :wtf:

 

[Geriatrix]

I'm still at a loss as to who is alluding to what here. It's hard making stereotypical comments on you guys if I don't know what I'm working with here. Help me out.

 

[STS]

I was referring to your second point as strawman.

In this case the dog doesn't have a choice as he cant get to the female.

is the dog bisexual then?

You think humans are different in this case how?

humans are extreme social animals, while monkies may show affection and try to fit in, we go so far as to read into what people say, follow stereotypes and fashion and overthink things. no other animals read magazines or are taught in school how to interact with other people, thus they don't apply labels and motives to everything.

like an animal may very well enjoy have same sex sexual activities, however the animal in almost every case will not solely focus on one gender, unless his choices are limited. it's human creativity and curiousity to see human qualities in other objects and creatures.

Yes exactly and some animals prefer the same sex over the opposite sex.

prefer, but not exclusively stick to, except with sheep, but again, i think it's the horns

Hes bisexual and this is different to my original point, as i said animal gets put together with same sex and opposite sex animal. Chooses to only mate with same sex animal not both.

show me studies then that show animals other than sheep solely focusing on one gender. animals have very specific gender roles in nature, as animals may focus is to reproduce, not get as many sexual partners as possible. in most cases sex is very uncomfortable for most animals and this is evident from having barbed penii, corkscrew penii, penii that lock into place once in the vagina and eating mates.

some birds take turns looking after the nest. now Sue Bird and Belinda Bird both want to have eggs together one day but they can't both be looking after each other's eggs as they are driven to do reproduce and build a nest. surely you realise that decisions like birds building a nest together and laying eggs in the same nest begin to become ludicrous.

No we're not seperate, humans are animals. The fact that you think differently shows how out of touch you are with reality.

we are seprate, as we have different adaptations and functions in nature. even tape worms penis fence, doesn't mean i'm going to go grab Buyeye and start playing with our swords. if you're looking for justification for something, don't look at tape worms, simply go and do it, that is all i am saying. looking at nature when animals face their own challenges and basically just want to reproduce when we are more worried about what Justin Bieber's next hair cut is goign to be and go through existential pangs is not the same

 

[STS]

I'm still at a loss as to who is alluding to what here. It's hard making stereotypical comments on you guys if I don't know what I'm working with here. Help me out.

people are people, dogs are dogs, birds are birds, bees are bees. if you have necrophicliac fantasies, don't get justification from penguins, just do it. likewise even if there are homosexual animals in nature as many people seem to hope, tough. people think homosexuality is cool coz it's in nature but so is cannibalism, and they wouldn't condone eating their kids, so why not just confess that we're different to animals and we have our own rituals and social system?

 

[Geriatrix]

Okay, so smalltownsky is saying "free love, man! Just be yourself and do what you love"
And the others?

 

[copacetic]

Homosexuality in nature is only generally brought up in reaction to the assertion that it's an abominable and unnatural activity.

 

[Techne]

Homosexuality in nature is only generally brought up in reaction to the assertion that it's an abominable and unnatural activity.

Providing examples in nature is not going to prove that acts are abominable and/or unnatural or natural or morally right or wrong.

You need philosophy and logic to try and demonstrate certain acts are intrinsically morally right or wrong.

So, when someone claims that sodomy is immoral or intrinsically and objectively morally wrong, that person is making a wide claim. It may not be the case for dogs or cats or monkeys, but it may be the case for humans. Showing examples of humans, dogs, cats or monkeys is not going to prove it is so or is not so.

It is simply a category mistake to think by providing examples of acts in nature that they are somehow "naturally right or wrong", never mind intrinsically and objectively morally wrong or right.

 

[azbob]

Sodomy is immoral? How will homosexual men make love to each other then?

 

[Jab]

But not solely driven to go for one sex. Even bisexuals may have a preference for one sex over another, what is the difference between homosexuals and bisexuals?

I saw a pigeon humping a dead pigeon that was hit by a car. Doesn't mean all pigeons are necrophiliacs, it just means that it's a dumb bird that doesn't care

Sexuality do not fall into fixed categories, like straight, gay or bisexual, it is a continuous spectrum of preference.

 

[STS]

Sexuality do not fall into fixed categories, like straight, gay or bisexual, it is a continuous spectrum of preference.

tell that to all the straight, gay and bisexual people

 

[copacetic]

Providing examples in nature is not going to prove that acts are abominable and/or unnatural or natural or morally right or wrong.

You need philosophy and logic to try and demonstrate certain acts are intrinsically morally right or wrong.

So, when someone claims that sodomy is immoral or intrinsically and objectively morally wrong, that person is making a wide claim. It may not be the case for dogs or cats or monkeys, but it may be the case for humans. Showing examples of humans, dogs, cats or monkeys is not going to prove it is so or is not so.

It is simply a category mistake to think by providing examples of acts in nature that they are somehow "naturally right or wrong", never mind intrinsically and objectively morally wrong or right.

As I say, it's simply in response to the statement that it's unnatural - That is where the error lies, not the obvious response to this, which is to point out that it happens in nature and as such is by definition natural.

I do agree of course, that the moral implications of our behaviour are not related to whether they are found in various animals or not.

 

[STS]

As I say, it's simply in response to the statement that it's unnatural - That is where the error lies, not the obvious response to this, which is to point out that it happens in nature and as such is by definition natural.

I do agree of course, that the moral implications of our behaviour are not related to whether they are found in various animals or not.

yeah, the problem is people look for justification in nature for whatever reason. if people debating agree on nature as being a place to determine what is natural and moral then they can go at it between themselves, but otherwise nature provides very little justification for anything that we do

 

[Geriatrix]

yeah, the problem is people look for justification in nature for whatever reason. if people debating agree on nature as being a place to determine what is natural and moral then they can go at it between themselves, but otherwise nature provides very little justification for anything that we do

Another problem is people try and use their various religious beliefs to try and tell others how to live their lives. Now this leaves us with a conundrum. We can either go on trying to tell others how to live their lives and try to justify it by looking at vague natural examples or scriptures or ideologies or what-not, or we can just let people live their lives in peace. Just like they let us live ours in peace. Makes sense, no?

 

[Techne]

As I say, it's simply in response to the statement that it's unnatural - That is where the error lies, not the obvious response to this, which is to point out that it happens in nature and as such is by definition natural.

Point being, the response misses the point and does not necessarily refute the other person's opinion.

 

[copacetic]

Point being, the response misses the point and does not necessarily refute the other person's opinion.

*shrug*