theDoctor said...

Where's your accordion?

FlySurfer said...

theDoctor said...

Where's your accordion?

with the look on that face probbly up it's arse

theDoctor said...

youngbull said...

^^^ not funny doctor don't go there..

if it was NATURAL, homosexual intercourse would produce an offspring, as ol' dave has told me via a many a nature doco, a natural intercourse would do.....


many of my friends are of the queer persuation, including my current house'mate', tolerance doesn't make it natural, my best mate, painfully straight as a dye earns his keep dancing in gay clubs... axelandra the great was apparently great at tossing the male salad, our current pm keeps a beard on hand for the mainsteam media...

on a conspiracy/protical bent, we are (in totality) our chemical make up, which is/can be influenced, via diet, or vaccine, our brain chemistry, which is influenced (determined) by our chemical bent. we are a big bag of chemicals, controlled by our influences, which are introduced chemicals. pre determined introduced chemicals.
ergo: homosexuality (as a norm) is an unnaturally influenced chemical bent

welcome to agenda 21

here we go , queue peter mac with some BPA chemical theory aon how plastic makes you gay!

Doctor do you wash your clothes in the same washing machine as your gay housmate? Just saying there'd be some chocolate and cream getting on the sheets, which would get mixed up with your clothes, and you would then have diluted bits of chocolate cream on your T shirt.

theDoctor said...


yeah well, unless you got a contract with jim rose...

hemaphrodite ain't quite natural either, well it might occur naturally but human(sic) evolution ain't built upon it

Human evolution ain't, but human (and other species) are built on a process that relies on mutations, which generate things like hermaphroditism, and, according to most scientists, homosexuality through genetics. Ergo even the changes that do not lead to full reproduction of fertile offsprings participate in the process of the evolution of the species.

Includes all the weirdos in this forum

On a more humorous note: "even those who think homosexuality is not a transmissible disease don't want their kids to catch it" (bad joke...)

pierrec45 said...

theDoctor said...


yeah well, unless you got a contract with jim rose...

hemaphrodite ain't quite natural either, well it might occur naturally but human(sic) evolution ain't built upon it

Human evolution ain't, but human (and other species) are built on a process that relies on mutations, which generate things like hermaphroditism, and, according to most scientists, homosexuality through genetics. Ergo even the changes that do not lead to full reproduction of fertile offsprings participate in the process of the evolution of the species.

Includes all the weirdos in this forum

On a more humorous note: "even those who think homosexuality is not a transmissible disease don't want their kids to catch it" (bad joke...)

If there were any scientists on this forum, they would point out that homosexuality has nothing to do with genetics. It is determined in utero, and linked to exposure to the mother's hormones. The grades vary, and societal and religious pressure has forced many borderline homosexuals to attempt living generally unhappy heterosexual lives. Such couples would produce offspring as normal as anyone else's.

Ignorance is also not genetic, but its permanent form, called stupidity, usually is.

The media promote this gay agenda making it cool to be gay.[for de-population]

This coupled with the huge increase in plastic use [BPA is a estrogen mimicker] are the two main reasons for increase in homosexuality.

petermac33 said...
Immersed in plastic containers,the BPA [synthetic estrogen hormone] leeches into the water/food making us males want to put lipstick/make-up on,wear short skirts and build a rose garden

OMG, I've been thinking about a rose garden... what next an Accordion, those $4000 $7999 Roland ones look awesome

buckles said...

It is accepted in the scientific world that homosexuality has nothing to do with learned behaviour. Homosexuality has existed well before and continued with the evolution of humans. A homosexual blokes desire to root another bloke is just as innate as my desire to root women and just as innate as my Golden Retriver's desire to go and get a tennis ball when I throw it. If all behaviour was learned, the term "innate" would not exist yet we know that some behaviours are innate and are simply part of out genetic composition as a result of evolution. Learned or not though, I can't see how any of this has anything at all to do with the legalisation of gay marriage?

For the record, it is legalisation that is sought, so it would be legal but certainly not compulsory. Look at it this way. ...Tomorrow I am planning to have left over Nachos for breakfast.. Many here and many more in the general population may well be opposed to eating nachos for breakfast. They nonetheless realise that they have no reason to campaign for laws against my particular choice because ultimately it has nothing to do with them and they realise that my choice in breakfast will not affect their life in any way whatsoever. There is no need for a law against nachos for breakfast because people are aware that they don't have to do it if they don't want to and if they do choose to have nachos for breakfast then nobody else will be in any way effected by that decision.

Gay marriage is the same as having nachos for breakfast. It is a decision that effects only those who choose to participate and is no-one elses business. It doesn't effect the lives of anyone else so why the hell would they care? Given that no-one in the world ever has actually managed to formulate a reason why it should be illegal, I'm more than kind of confused as to why it is.

Buckles, that's a pretty good anology for explaining one aspect of the debate. I think the reason some people are opposed is because they see it as erroding the meaning of marriage (in their eyes).
Just imagine a group of people developed a water sport that used boards with big fins and triangle sails mounted on the boards. They decided to call it 'windsurfing' and proceeded to create clubs and associations based on the common love of boards with big fins and triangle sails. All was good in the world....
Then another group of people developed a seperate but related sport that used smaller boards with smaller fins and instead of a triangle sail they used a kite.
Imagine the caos if the second group then insisted on being able to also call their sport windsurfing and hence join the clubs and associations as equal members.
The first group may well say, "hey, we respect your right to do things your way, we even tolerate your boardies over wetty thing, and in time may come to terms with the yellow polka dot boardies, but it's just not windsurfing!"
"windsurfing is using big boards with big fins and triangle sails attached to said big boards, that is what makes it windsurfing. Do what ever you want, take your place in the circuit, but don't be calling it windsufing"

You sound very lucky that you and your wife work so well. You're either newly married or lucky in that things seem to work. That's not the case with most people. It is something you always work towards. You work towards oneness.

stamp said...

FlySurfer said...
[br
That's complete bullpoop, sure mutations happen but you can spot those ones, and their easier to eat... life evolves through intent.
Zebra like species wishes he could reach taller branches with more food > writes instructions in to DNA > ~100 generations later you have a giraffe.

please tell me nobody actually believes this.
you are taking the pi55 right?

and to think that all this time i was under the impression that evolution results from natural selection. when actually it's just those members of a species who 'want it more'.
i hope you've contacted the participants in the human genome project to let them know they are on the wrong track.

meanwhile i'll get to work and just 'write' some instructions to my DNA to create a smarter, stronger version of me in the next generation.

Agreed. I think Flysurfer must have fallen asleep when trying to understand evolution, and just made up the second part.

Flysurfer, a mutation is not like on the X-Men.

FlySurfer said...

pierrec45 said...
Human evolution ain't, but human (and other species) are built on a process that relies on mutations.

That's complete bullpoop, sure mutations happen but you can spot those ones, and their easier to eat... life evolves through intent.
Zebra like species wishes he could reach taller branches with more food > writes instructions in to DNA > ~100 generations later you have a giraffe.

Version for irrational religious: God makes Giraffe
Version for irrational atheist: Zebra randomly mutates in to Giraffe

Or perhaps this version....

(Sorry, I just need some wind...)

Edit: according to google, the text translates to "You can already see the Friday"

Anyway, this guys' my favourite blogger, and, if anyone can be bothered a great article about the conservatives responses to "gay Marriage". Sorry Petermac33 there's no mention of plastic linings or UFO's heathenscripture.wordpress.com/2011/08/22/joyce-katter-devine-last-bastion-against-the-gaypocalypse/

But, marriage is not just a word that should be thrown around. It is a covenant with god between a man and a woman. It is bad enough that society has degraded marriage. But even worse that gay people want to label their union as 'marriage'.


Ok - cool, lets make "marriage" a special state between a man and a woman, but only those approved of by "god" (so atheists and those who can't actually prove their church attendance and Christian leanings should be excluded)

And while we're at lets also go along the lines of "a marriage is for the purposes of producing children" so all marriages that don't produce offspring within say 2 years should be annulled

Can you imagine if we start telling everyone who doesn't have children or show active belief in God that their marriages are not quite the same as those of good christian child producing marriages and should now be referred to as "civil unions" - just as good as marriage, just different!!

tmurray said...




But, marriage is not just a word that should be thrown around. It is a covenant with god between a man and a woman. It is bad enough that society has degraded marriage. But even worse that gay people want to label their union as 'marriage'.


Ok - cool, lets make "marriage" a special state between a man and a woman, but only those approved of by "god" (so atheists and those who can't actually prove their church attendance and Christian leanings should be excluded)

And while we're at lets also go along the lines of "a marriage is for the purposes of producing children" so all marriages that don't produce offspring within say 2 years should be annulled

Can you imagine if we start telling everyone who doesn't have children or show active belief in God that their marriages are not quite the same as those of good christian child producing marriages and should now be referred to as "civil unions" - just as good as marriage, just different!!

tmurray, you're tongue-in-cheek, right?? You have to be, right??!! OMFG...no pun intended.

There's lots of 'good' Christians out there who lead great lives and never go to church services; there's lots of 'bad' Christians out there who lead ******, maleficent lives attending services on a regular basis.

And what about the other religions????

And what about the people who have a Higher Power but don't give He/She/It a name and don't belong to, what essentially is an elitist, exclusive community that pours money into building places of worship and lining the coffers, and and and. I went to a Christian service recently...you know how many times the plate got passed around....4!!!!!!!

I like to think that my Higher Power is not judgmental or the old style fire and brimstone God. I choose that name because it's simple and I need to keep things fairly simple in my complicated life. If you want, I'll call my HP Goddess/Doggess/Dog/Wind/Water/My Boat??!!
My point is that the God I know is all-loving, all-powerful, all-nurturing, and all-accepting. This God supports a loving union of any description between any consenting adults...what we call it is arguing semantics.

FFS, why can't we just let people be?? It doesn't matter whether they're gay by nature or nurture...they are what they are. A little bit of empathy here may be in order!!! It's a hard slog dealing with common, bottom of the garden sexuality, let alone having to live in a skin which does not conform to what "should" be in our heterosexually dominant society. They are our fellow human beings and should be accorded the same privileges and rights as us Norms....There's no skin off my nose by guys or girls wanting to marry another of the same gender. For me personally, the 'sacred institution of marriage'....and of course, this is purely from a going through ****e divorce at this very moment perspective....is highly romanticised and overrated BUT it should be an option for all consenting adults not just some.

Soooo getting ready for the flack hehehe.........what else to do on a drizzly Sunday afternoon with the wind howling and the boat shaking. Study and lively debate...gotta love it

^^^ So why are there so many mexicans then?