You keep using the word "natural". I don't think it means what you think it means.

[Cutlass]

Rewriting history is what the left does. Denying reality is what the left does. Redefining words is what the left does. Sowing seeds of confusion and dissension is what the left does. Taking from producers and giving to the freeloaders is what the left does. Stealing credit is what the left does. Tearing down institutions is what the left does. Fostering hate is what the left does. Pointing fingers and scapegoating is what the left does.

The only thing the left willingly shares is misery, indeed, it insists on forcing us all to eat a heaping portion of it.

This is why the left loves big government. Stripping us of the means to defend ourselves and our rights and property by using concentrated power to inflict upon the people indignity, poverty, and hopelessness.

So even though this is what you do, and the political right in the US doesn't really do much of anything else these days, you still want to blame others for your actions.

So much for personal responsibility.

 

[Arakhor]

There are these things at the end of chromosomes, tellurids or something, that women can regenerate and men cannot. This allows for chromosomes to be duplicated more times, thus allowing women to naturally live longer than men. Although, that also made their health worse. That is, at a given moment, a man and woman of the same age with the same lifestyles will be in different health states.

Those things are telomeres. Tellurides are a type of ore containing the Group 6 element tellurium.

 

[Zack]

This is why the left loves big government. Stripping us of the means to defend ourselves and our rights and property by using concentrated power to inflict upon the people indignity, poverty, and hopelessness.

A right-winger accusing lefties of inflicting poverty? That's rich. Your entire philosophy is to turn a blind eye to the plight of the poor.

 

[Arakhor]

That post was so reality-warping that I promptly ignored it. Thanks for engaging it!

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Hmmm... now you're going too far, you know? I wrote that in what, 5 minutes? I agree it's not necessarily a good example or anything, but. I just wanted to draw an example. Of course it is ridiculously undeveloped for my purpose, but what do you want? It's nearly 1 am and I'm tired. And you're being a dick here. I must say, I can behave like that related to absurd little things. But well, you just shocked me.

Because, I don't even know what you mean, what you say I was trying to do.

You stated drugs were harmful, akin to how one states that the sky is blue and most humans have two eyes. Like it was a constant feature of reality. Something law-like. Hence, something universally true.
And you then went on to infer from that that drugs are wrong. Again in this law-like and hence universal manner.
I noted, that this is futile. For the reason, that your premise is wrong exactly because you portray it to be universal.

You respond that this was just to illustrate a point, being that one needs to seek a balance between happiness and suffering. But the incorrectness of your illustration reflects on this point, as it highlights the simple insight, that how that balance actually works depends on the individual. So I think I am justified to note so.

However, I admit that a short sentence which sole purpose at first sight is to establish that someone is plain and simple wrong to not be very pleasant to look at if you are that someone. But just as you just wanted to quickly write something, so did I.

Additionally, after writing a very long post on the merits of AA, my mind is wrapped with soulless arguments, which probably makes me a bit asocial at this very moment. Additionally, I am kind of tired. And also I feel a little like being smug, but not enough to not feel bad if I have hurt you with that.

So after we have hopefully reached mutual understanding, I think the way to go is for me to apologize to have hurt your feelings.

A right-winger accusing lefties of inflicting poverty? That's rich. Your entire philosophy is to turn a blind eye to the plight of the poor.

I wish OT's philosophy was to turn a blind eye to him.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Redefining words is what the left does.

Ic ungemódnesse, áwierge Normanen. Ænglisc ferhþ!

 

[Core Imposter]

A right-winger accusing lefties of inflicting poverty? That's rich. Your entire philosophy is to turn a blind eye to the plight of the poor.

Julia doesn't need a political sugar daddy. She needs the freedom to stand on her own two feet.

Set my people free.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Sadly, not when I am in the reply window and scroll down.

 

[Cutlass]

Julia doesn't need a political sugar daddy. She needs the freedom to stand on her own two feet.

Set my people free.

And yet the very heart and sole of your philosophy is to prevent that from happening....

 

[Traitorfish]

Now now, everyone knows that "freedom" is entirely and exclusively negative, and only the basest Stalinist would claim otherwise. Unless it's about giving state money to churches or inviting fascists to your debates, then positive freedoms are vital and necessary, and only the basest Stalinist would claim otherwise. It's, like, Political Philosophy 101.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

(It has been proven, if you asked yourselves really so, that homosexuals DON'T BORN homosexuals, they MAKE THEMSLVES so.
In fact, when your parents divorce as you being a child the possibility of being gay is tripled)

Homosexual relations are not natural.
Firstly, the human body is not created to serve to such purposes. (yes, I refer for example to a$$ penetration)
Secondly, a very interesting way to prove that something is natural is to see the opinion of an innocent child. Little children disgust themselves when they see an homosexual pair kissing each other
Thirdly, homosexual marriages last by average 18 months
Fourthly, the average of couples of an homosexual by year is 30
Fifthly, the homosexuals are the social collective who spend more money on psychologists by person
Etc.


Oh, and in Spain the Gay lobby has made the newspapers publish one positive propagandist article a day, if not, they would publish some shameful details of this international section journalist, and so on. TO THE JURY!

There are lots of factors that can influence the chance of homosexuality, the most important of which is the hormone levels experienced in utero. There is also a strong correlation between male homosexuality and how many older brothers a boy's mother has carried, which one could argue is an adaptation to reduce competition for mates among groups with more males than females. I read somewhere that the only societies that do not have homosexuals are primitive bands that eliminate competition by practicing communal ownership of all property and allowing any male to mate with any female.


Homosexual relations are extremely natural, being very common among a wide variety of animals and especially primates.

Note that being natural is not relevant in determining whether something is good or bad. The bible speaks of the natural man in rather negative terms.


The "innocent child test" would also conclusively prove that heterosexual relations are unnatural, particularly between one's own parents.


When speaking of the stability of homosexual relationships, it is important to break things down further. Male homosexuals tend to have shorter relationships, but lesbian relationships tend to last longer. There are plenty of exceptions in both groups though, and a lot of short heterosexual relationships as well.


The greater incidence of psychological problems among homosexuals can easily be explained by the way they are treated by those such as yourself.

 

[Arakhor]

And for the record, "innocent children" react according to learned behaviour, whether it's by touching a hot pan or listening to their parents. If they don't know about something, they will have to learn a new way of acting on the spot.

 

[JohannaK]

Those things are telomeres. Tellurides are a type of ore containing the Group 6 element tellurium.

I knew I was wrong. Half past midnight is not the best time to remember scientific terms.

 

[ShahJahanII]

"Natural" means "the way the world should be according to a my holy book".

 

[JohannaK]

Inconceivable!

 

[cardgame]

(It has been proven, if you asked yourselves really so, that homosexuals DON'T BORN homosexuals, they MAKE THEMSLVES so.

It is an indisputable fact that heterosexuals don't born heterosexuals either. What do you make of that?

 

[JohannaK]

I don't know if I'm hetero or homo, for instance.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

You are also French.

 

[Crezth]

(It has been proven, if you asked yourselves really so, that homosexuals DON'T BORN homosexuals, they MAKE THEMSLVES so.
In fact, when your parents divorce as you being a child the possibility of being gay is tripled)

Homosexual relations are not natural.
Firstly, the human body is not created to serve to such purposes. (yes, I refer for example to a$$ penetration)
Secondly, a very interesting way to prove that something is natural is to see the opinion of an innocent child. Little children disgust themselves when they see an homosexual pair kissing each other
Thirdly, homosexual marriages last by average 18 months
Fourthly, the average of couples of an homosexual by year is 30
Fifthly, the homosexuals are the social collective who spend more money on psychologists by person
Etc.

Replace every instance of "homosexual" with "black-white," add a few potatoes, some salt, and you got yourself a stew going on some hate speech.

 

[holy king]

I don't know if I'm hetero or homo, for instance.

You are also French.

that's tantamount.