"Plato stated categorically that homosexuality (the behaviour at least)
is wrong because it is unnatural --it is not something done by the
animals. 'Our citizens should not be inferior to birds and many
species of animals...'[21]."[r188] Homosexuality is unnatural among the
animal kingdom; it is not done preferentially, or exclusively by
animals.
"... both Socrates and Plato unambiguously reject and condemn all
taking of homosexual attraction to the point of intercourse and
orgasm.... they were reflecting.... a great respect for self-constraint
and control [--something which modern homosexuals notably lack.]
Homosexual attraction [was] accepted ... but consummation [was]
condemned."[r180] Both Socrates and Plato condemned sodomy and fellatio.
Schopenhauer, following in the Greek tradition, also recognized the
existence of homosexual attraction, but felt that "only a thoroughly
depraved nature will succumb to it" --as he considered sodomy to be
"a monstrosity."[86] (Bryan Magee, who suggests that Schopenhauer was
tempted at one point by homosexual attraction, admits that "he resisted
the temptation, and never committed a homosexual act.")
"...quite apart from homosexuality's prohibition on Biblical grounds,
for [Thomas] Aquinas it is necessarily barred as being against natural
law: as being in conflict with 'right reason'[22]. Homosexual encounters
do not lead to children, therefore they must be wrong."[r184]
"[Augustine recommended that] those shameful acts against nature, such
as were committed in Sodom, ought everywhere and always to be detested
and punished. If all nations were to do such things, they would be held
guilty of the same crime by the law of God, which has not so made men
that they should use one another in this way."[23] Augustine supported
stigmatization of homosexuals.
"[Immanuel Kant condemned] A second [carnal crime against nature]
[which was] intercourse between [those of same gender], in which the
object of sexual impulse is a human being but there is homogeneity
instead of heterogeneity of sex, as when a woman satisfies her desire
on a woman, or a man on a man. This practice too is contrary to the
ends of humanity; for the end of humanity in respect of sexuality is to
preserve the species without debasing the person; but in this instance
the species is not being preserved.... but the person is set aside, the
self is degraded below the level of the animals, and humanity is
dishonoured."[24]
From the "Second Introduction":
And we should not allow the revisionists to re-write the history of our
great men who are no longer around to defend themselves. If you value
their work, defend their integrity. For example, Schopenhauer was "a
confirmed bachelor" with decidedly misogynistic views. In his biography,
Bryan Magee, after spending several paragraphs trying to prove that he
was a homosexual, ultimately admits that "he never committed a homosexual
act." But at that point, the die has been cast, and other people,
drawing on his work will gloss over that one sentence in favour of the
general impression.
It is a common feature of such revisionism that it conveniently blurs
the distinction between thought and action, between recognition and
participation. Many of the Greeks like Plato and Socrates recognized
the existence of such an attraction (whether they personally felt it or
not), but for them to have actually done these things was anathema to
the Greek love of reason and self-control. Also, people often misquote
verses: Socrates was thrown in jail for "corrupting the youth"
--because he was teaching the young to criticize the teachings of their
elders. In the hands of homosexual revisionists, this has been
"corrupted" to mean that he was having sex with youths.
The homosexuals of today are characterized by what they do, and on that
basis none of these examples is accurate. The very fact that someone
may have felt some sort of attraction does not make them a homosexual
in the modern sense if they did not act on it. And the fact that
someone may have supported homosexuality in some way does not make them
a homosexual. Only if it can be proven that someone actually engaged in
a homosexual act can it truly be said that they are a homosexual in the
modern sense of the word. The blurring of this distinction is
important because modern homosexuals use it to pigeon-hole sexually
confused youths into the "gay" category for recruitment. We shouldn't
allow them to do this to our Great Men either.
Homosexuals suffer from a perversion which means that their thinking
is distorted by their obsession. They cannot help seeing allusions to
their behaviour in things other people have written or done. Everywhere
they look, they see covert homosexual behaviour. One ridiculous example
I saw recently involved a homosexual who saw covert references to Jesus
"being a homosexual" in the Bible.
Excerpted from http://www.crusader.net/texts/cng/homo.html
So it is OK to be bisexual, and only have sex with men occaisionally?
>
> "... both Socrates and Plato unambiguously reject and condemn all
> taking of homosexual attraction to the point of intercourse and
> orgasm.... they were reflecting.... a great respect for self-constraint
> and control [--something which modern homosexuals notably lack.]
> Homosexual attraction [was] accepted ... but consummation [was]
> condemned."[r180] Both Socrates and Plato condemned sodomy and fellatio.
And what about heterosexual sodomy and fellatio?
>
> Schopenhauer, following in the Greek tradition, also recognized the
> existence of homosexual attraction, but felt that "only a thoroughly
> depraved nature will succumb to it" --as he considered sodomy to be
> "a monstrosity."[86] (Bryan Magee, who suggests that Schopenhauer was
> tempted at one point by homosexual attraction, admits that "he resisted
> the temptation, and never committed a homosexual act.")
So he was a repressed homosexual.
>
> "...quite apart from homosexuality's prohibition on Biblical grounds,
> for [Thomas] Aquinas it is necessarily barred as being against natural
> law: as being in conflict with 'right reason'[22]. Homosexual encounters
> do not lead to children, therefore they must be wrong."[r184]
So celibacy does not lead to children, and must be wrong. And if one
member of a heterosexual couple is infertile, and sex does not lead to
children, sex between that married couple is wrong?
>
> "[Augustine recommended that] those shameful acts against nature, such
> as were committed in Sodom, ought everywhere and always to be detested
> and punished. If all nations were to do such things, they would be held
> guilty of the same crime by the law of God, which has not so made men
> that they should use one another in this way."[23] Augustine supported
> stigmatization of homosexuals.
I would like you to give me the Biblical quote that tells us that the
sin committed in Sodom was homosexuality. It says they were sinners, but
not what sin they committed. Also, an interesting sidelight--the three
"righteous" people who survived the destruction of Sodom, Lot and his
two daughters, we find in the next chapter. The two daughters got Lot
drunk, had sex with him, and got pregnant. Is this the righteous
behavior that you advocate?
>
> "[Immanuel Kant condemned] A second [carnal crime against nature]
> [which was] intercourse between [those of same gender], in which the
> object of sexual impulse is a human being but there is homogeneity
> instead of heterogeneity of sex, as when a woman satisfies her desire
> on a woman, or a man on a man. This practice too is contrary to the
> ends of humanity; for the end of humanity in respect of sexuality is to
> preserve the species without debasing the person; but in this instance
> the species is not being preserved.... but the person is set aside, the
> self is degraded below the level of the animals, and humanity is
> dishonoured."[24]
So if the preservation of humanity calls for a decrease in the number of
people rather than the irresponsible covering of the earth six deep,
then heterosexuality should be a sin, and homosexuality the proper
course?
So where are you going to demonstrate where the Bible says the people of
Sodom were homosexual?
> Excerpted from http://www.crusader.net/texts/cng/homo.html
>"Plato stated categorically that homosexuality (the behaviour at least)
>is wrong because it is unnatural --it is not something done by the
>animals. 'Our citizens should not be inferior to birds and many
>species of animals...'"
We've since discovered, through observation, that he was wrong.
Thus is disproven the only claim of fact which you cited. The rest of
your post was mere opinion, which does not need to be argued against.
Peace,
John Simpson
fe...@mindspring.com
http://www.mindspring.com/~feste
============================================
"Foolery, sir, doth walk about the orb like the sun; it shines everywhere."
--Shakespeare, TWELFTH NIGHT
I read in the paper recently that te Uiversity of Georgia did an
experiment on men who considered themselves hetersexual by exposing them
to gay porno and then testing them with electrodes for sexual arousal.
They found that those who were the most agressively "anti-homosexual"
were the most likely to be sexually aroused by images of gay sex.
Kind of makes you wonder what is going on above that someone would take
the trouble to comnpose long essays, subscribe to an anonymous mailer
service and then cross-post to a dozen news groups.
Well, Herman, I am afraid you are trying to educate someone who is beyond
the reach of conventional teaching techniques.
If you go to the home page highlighted in Anonymous's postings, you will
not only find a great deal of homophobic material, but hot links to white
supremacist and anti-semetic material as well. Is it any wonder that
Jeff Vos choses to be Anonymous, ... most of the time?
Rod
I wonder what anonymous does with his pets when nobody is looking?
: "Plato stated categorically that homosexuality (the behaviour at least)
: is wrong because it is unnatural --it is not something done by the
: animals. 'Our citizens should not be inferior to birds and many
: species of animals...'[21]."[r188] Homosexuality is unnatural among the
: animal kingdom; it is not done preferentially, or exclusively by
: animals.
Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
a variety of animal species.
But even if he were right, so what?
Greek citizens were able to perform a variety of acts that no "species
of animals" are capable of. Ship-building, astronomy, mathematics, self-awareness,
speech, building cities, fighting wars against the Trojans,etc,etc....
If we limited are activites to only those that animals do we wouldn't get
very far.
In fact by posting to this newsgroup Mr. Anonymous you are performing an
act that is unnatural, since no animals post to newsgroups.
How perverted!!! Yuck.
J McF
>
>Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
>a variety of animal species.
>
Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
which animals these are?
I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
they are.
Thanks - BobJ.
] -On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
] -wrote:
] -
] ->
] ->Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
] ->a variety of animal species.
] ->
] -
] -Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
] -same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
] -which animals these are?
] -
] -I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
] -they are.
] -
Bulls have been known to mount each other quite frequently...
Hell, I've seen my dog mount another male dog... it happens...
... you have a nice day too.
RatTrap
rattrap@usa..net
--------------------------------------------------------
"We share the same biology, regardless of ideology"
- Sting - "Russians"
--------------------------------------------------------
The comments, ideas and beliefs expressed here are mine,
not my employer's, not my politician's, not my mom's,
and not some garbage dragged out of a book or magazine.
Use your mind, examine your morals, and think freely.
-------------------------------------------------------
It has been observed in a number of species, mostly occuring when there
is a population of male-only animals. I have only seen it firsthand in
rats, both male-male and female-female. Basically, they will mount each
other and go through the motions. I doubt there is any kind of
penetration going on (rats haven't invented K-Y yet), but it is
definitely sexual in nature.
Note that the rats seem to be bi rather than hetero or homo. Given the
choice, they will all mate with the opposite sex, but will engage in
homosexual acts if isolated with only the same sex for a certain amount
of time. Some took longer than others to warm up to same-sex mating,
but all did it within a week.
For information's sake, these were perfectly normal rats, pets of a
friend of mine. He keeps the sexes separate to keep them from
reproducing. He noticed two females mounting each other, and did an
informal study out of curiousity. If anyone has a formal study on hand,
could you post them?
For other species, I have no firsthand information or references handy,
but I know that it has been observed in some birds and in fruitflies. I
also seem to remember a study involving chimps in which males mated with
each other.
Hope that helps.
--
Nikolai Faaland
nik...@nwlink.com
"Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste.
Been around for a long long year, stolen many a man's soul and faith.
And I was around when Jesus Christ has his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate washed his hands, and sealed his fate.
Pleased to meet you, hope you guess my name!" -Rolling Stones
>On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 06:02:24 GMT, b...@ezon.com (BobJ.) spewed the following
>dreck:
>
>] -On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
>] -wrote:
>] -
>] ->
>] ->Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
>] ->a variety of animal species.
>] ->
>] -
>] -Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
>] -same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
>] -which animals these are?
>] -
>] -I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
>] -they are.
>] -
>
>Bulls have been known to mount each other quite frequently...
>
>Hell, I've seen my dog mount another male dog... it happens...
>... you have a nice day too.
>
>RatTrap
>rattrap@usa..net
>
It's fairly common with cattle. Cows mounting cows, etc. Even steers
will sometimes get into the act. Of course, there is no actual sex.
The odd bull will be a real dud, perferring the company of steers.
Never seen it in horses, though a mare in heat will quite often
display when a strange horse of any gender, even a gelding is brought
near.
Cheers
--
Dave Diduck
1123 Fort St
Regina Sk S4T 5R9
http://www.sasknet.com/~didue/
The majority are not silent - politicians have selective hearing!
The Bonobos chimpanzee is one..... a very homosexual active one.....
--
Ciao!
John S. 8^{)>
tedd...@netcom.com
__
>On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 06:02:24 GMT, b...@ezon.com (BobJ.) spewed the following
>dreck:
>
>] -On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
>] -wrote:
>] -
>] ->
>] ->Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
>] ->a variety of animal species.
>] ->
>] -
>] -Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
>] -same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
>] -which animals these are?
>] -
>] -I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
>] -they are.
>] -
>
>Bulls have been known to mount each other quite frequently...
>
>Hell, I've seen my dog mount another male dog... it happens...
>... you have a nice day too.
>
>RatTrap
>rattrap@usa..net
>
Mounting? Dogs will mount anything near by, it surely can't be claimed
that this is a homosexual actions on their part. No, I am looking for
an example in nature where two, same sex animals actually have sex and
that is the "norm" for any percentage of that species?
Waiting, thanks - BobJ.
The Bonobos chimpanzee male mounts other male Bonobos chimpanzees and
achieve actual penetration and often ejaculation... This has been
observed and filmed and videotaped in both the native habitat as well as
the captive habitat of the zoo and even the "wild animal parks"....
May I suggest that you go to a PBS "Store of Knowledge" and obtain a
copy of the National Geographic video on the Bonobos chimpanzee...
Your ignorance is showing..... but I am sure you cannot tell with such a
low IQ, about 49 I would say from your post....
clueless is as clueless does!
chicago7==clueless==ignoramus
] -On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 04:24:20 GMT, tedd...@netcom.com (John Sanger) scribed:
] -
] ->The Bonobos chimpanzee male mounts other male Bonobos chimpanzees and
] ->achieve actual penetration and often ejaculation... This has been
] ->observed and filmed and videotaped in both the native habitat as well as
] ->the captive habitat of the zoo and even the "wild animal parks"....
] ->
] ->May I suggest that you go to a PBS "Store of Knowledge" and obtain a
] ->copy of the National Geographic video on the Bonobos chimpanzee...
] ->
] ->--
] ->Ciao!
] -> John S. 8^{)>
] -> tedd...@netcom.com
] -
] -
] -That doesn't prove shit! What the hell does a goddamn chimp know...They're
] -nasty things that will fuck a snake if they can get somebody to hold it's
] -head!
It seems that the chimp is more mature and cultured than yourself... accept it.
] -Now, if you're telling us this because you're ranching with an old boar
] -chimp...Man, you are you're one sick monkey fucker, you know it?
Amazing... someone talks about the practices of a chimp somewhere out in the
jungle, and you immediately think that "Oh, that guys gotta be fucking it!"
Freud would have several comments about that.
] -Damn Queers...next thing you know they'll want to mingle with the good people!
Damn bigots... next thing you know, they'll want to mingle with the humans...
... you have a nice day too.
RatTrap
You all must remember only man was created in God's image and animals
are not judged as to sin! If you don't accept the Bible and other
religious works then you are on your own as to what you see as good or
bad.
Lyle Scott
Dogs will lick their own anuses and eat excrement too! Should humans do
this also? There are many behaviours that animals do that we don't yet
by all fact we too are animals! What sets us apart form the lower
primates is that we were made in the image of God. Regardless of how
seemingly human like animals may be they do not have consciences, a
conceptualized thinking, long term desires etc. they are only motivated
by instinct and not by any form of rational thought. The day I see
chimps play a string quartet will be the day I will be open to your
arguments about homosexuality as being normal as proved by the behaviour
of the animal kingdom. I come not to judge.
Lyle Scott
>
> Your ignorance is showing..... but I am sure you cannot tell with such a
> low IQ, about 49 I would say from your post....
>
> clueless is as clueless does!
>
> chicago7==clueless==ignoramus
>
Herman if we go by your reasoning then would it be feasible to conclude
that you are obsessed with Nazis and therefore you are a Nazi too? You
do post a large number of posts about Nazism which you can't deny and
you often repeat the same exact message too!
Lyle Scott
] -grea...@mindspring.com wrote:
] ->
] -> Anonymous wrote:
] -> >
] -> >
] -> > Homosexuals suffer from a perversion which means that their thinking
] -> > is distorted by their obsession. They cannot help seeing allusions to
] -> > their behaviour in things other people have written or done. <snip>
] ->
] -> I agree with you having an obsession with homosexuality by the large
] -> number of your posts on the subject.
] -> Can't you even understand the paragraph above that you wrote yourself?
] ->
] -> Herman
] -
] -Herman if we go by your reasoning then would it be feasible to conclude
] -that you are obsessed with Nazis and therefore you are a Nazi too? You
] -do post a large number of posts about Nazism which you can't deny and
] -you often repeat the same exact message too!
Funny, I don't see where Herman says "You are obsessed with homosexuality,
therefore, you must be homosexual"... I DO see where he points out that this
person is obsessed with Homosexuality and ends his point. As for Herman being
obsessed with Nazism, I can't see a problem with that... anyone who is
vehemently against crimes against humanity is doing a good job...
... although... anyone who is vehemently against humanity on the other hand,
such as the original author of this thread (You know, the homophobic babbler...)
should have their head examined...
Are you on record for impartial justice?
If you are not then you are a hypocrite.
Do you view the brutal treatment of Palestinians by Israelis as being
crimes against humanity also? Amnesty International has documented
abuses that rival and even surpass what Nazis were accused of and tried
for.
check it out at http://www.iap.org
Lyle Scott
> RatTrap
> rattrap@usa..net
> >That doesn't prove shit! What the hell does a goddamn chimp know...They're
> >nasty things that will fuck a snake if they can get somebody to hold it's
> >head!
> >
> >Damn Queers...next thing you know they'll want to mingle with the good people!
> >
>
> Your ignorance is showing..... but I am sure you cannot tell with such a
> low IQ, about 49 I would say from your post....
It may not have been the most elegant post around, but it did mention
something that has been lost by many here: that animal behaviour cannot
be translated into being acceptable human behaviour. If you rationale
homosexuality based on homosexual acts by animals (which at BEST
indicate bisexuality), then you leave yourself open to accepting other
actions of animals. Would anybody support a man beating up another man
to sleep with the other man's wife? Of course not, yet male animals
will often challenge another male's claim to a herd. Would anybody
support male "ownership" of large numbers of women for sexual purposes?
Yet that's a common trait in social animals.
> --
> Ciao!
> John S. 8^{)>
> tedd...@netcom.com
> __
--
Lars Ormberg
(I don't know where Mr. T lives. Stop phoning my home)
la...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
__
The Commodore's webpage is bigger, badder, and more Java-packed than
ever before! Take a tour at http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/ and have
an experience only categorizable as Lars On-Line!
* The Borg--our most lethal enemy--have begun an invasion of the
Federation. The assimilation continues...STAR TREK:FIRST CONTACT is
still showing in theatres across the country. (Oh, and some Star Wars
thing is supposedly on as well. Like anybody cares).
] -RatTrap wrote:
] -> As for Herman being
] -> obsessed with Nazism, I can't see a problem with that... anyone who is
] -> vehemently against crimes against humanity is doing a good job...
] - Are you on record for impartial justice?
] - If you are not then you are a hypocrite.
Ahh... that's a trap I'm not falling into. It depends on your definition of
impartial justice...
If you mean that I feel that people should be punished for their crimes?
Absolutely...
If you mean that an entire country or race of people should be held accountable
for their government, or a specific groups' actions? No, I do not.
] -Do you view the brutal treatment of Palestinians by Israelis as being
] -crimes against humanity also?
Be specific... you're lumping all of Israelis into your battle... do the
individuals who inflict the brutal treatment deserve to be tried and punished if
found guilty? Absolutely...
... But this isn't what we're discussing here. Don't jump off topic to bring in
your own political agenda... I won't play your game. If I feel the need to jump
into the ring with the Israelis and Palestinians, then I will... don't drag me
in.
Like Justice from a Luger in the back of the neck that you gave to
thousands of innocents in Europe.
If there was truly Justice in Nurenberg they wouldn't allow scum like
you sullying the United States of America. You should have been at the
end of a rope like your friends, associates and admirers.
How many big strong powerful Germans did it take to carry Anne Frank out
of her home in Holland? Four? Ten? Fifty?
Germans screamed "We didn't know! We didn't know about the Concentration
Camps! We didn't know about the gassings!"
NOW THEY KNOW
And this Nazi scum continues on.
Herman
On Fri, 14 Feb 1997, Lyle Scott wrote:
> grea...@mindspring.com wrote:
> >
> > Anonymous wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Homosexuals suffer from a perversion which means that their thinking
> > > is distorted by their obsession. They cannot help seeing allusions to
> > > their behaviour in things other people have written or done. <snip>
> >
> > I agree with you having an obsession with homosexuality by the large
> > number of your posts on the subject.
> > Can't you even understand the paragraph above that you wrote yourself?
> >
> > Herman
>
> Herman if we go by your reasoning then would it be feasible to conclude
> that you are obsessed with Nazis and therefore you are a Nazi too? You
> do post a large number of posts about Nazism which you can't deny and
> you often repeat the same exact message too!
> Lyle Scott
>
>
] -On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 14:18:59 GMT, rat...@delete-this-to-reply.usa.net
] -(RatTrap) scribed:
] -
] ->] -Now, if you're telling us this because you're ranching with an old boar
] ->] -chimp...Man, you are you're one sick monkey fucker, you know it?
] ---
] ->Amazing... someone talks about the practices of a chimp somewhere out in the
] ->jungle, and you immediately think that "Oh, that guys gotta be fucking it!"
] ->Freud would have several comments about that.
] -
] -Freud might have found Micheal Jackson's fondness for "Chimps" interesting
] -too.
Actually, no... Freud wouldn't have paid much attention to that. Had Michael
Jackson had the tendency to constantly refer to chimps as sexual partners,
either for himself, or just in general, or had he had a dream about chimps, or
had he slipped and said "Chimp" instead of woman, Freud might have found that
interesting...
] -
] -Surely if that kind of "stuff" is good enough for MJ, it's good enough for
] -the average queer!
So, are you implying that:
(a) Homosexuals must be fond of chimps because Michael Jackson is?
(b) Michael Jackson has sex with chimps?
(c) Homosexuals do whatever Michael Jackson does?
(d) Homosexuals like to have sex with chimps?
Whatever the case may be, I'd like to see where you get your information... does
the National Enquirer have a section specifically for bigoted morons?
... and what IS you obsession with monkeys anyway? You brought them up in the
first place...
>In article <3304aa1a...@Concord01.news.internex.net> b...@ezon.com (BobJ.) writes:
>>On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 18:57:17 GMT, rat...@delete-this-to-reply.usa.net
>>(RatTrap) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 06:02:24 GMT, b...@ezon.com (BobJ.) spewed the following
>>>dreck:
>>>
>>>] -On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
>>>] -wrote:
>>>] -
>>>] ->
>>>] ->Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
>>>] ->a variety of animal species.
>>>] ->
>>>] -
>>>] -Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
>>>] -same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
>>>] -which animals these are?
>>>] -
>>>] -I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
>>>] -they are.
>>>] -
>>>
>>>Bulls have been known to mount each other quite frequently...
>>>
>>>Hell, I've seen my dog mount another male dog... it happens...
>>>... you have a nice day too.
>>>
>>
>>Mounting? Dogs will mount anything near by, it surely can't be claimed
>>that this is a homosexual actions on their part. No, I am looking for
>>an example in nature where two, same sex animals actually have sex and
>>that is the "norm" for any percentage of that species?
>>
>
>The Bonobos chimpanzee male mounts other male Bonobos chimpanzees and
>achieve actual penetration and often ejaculation... This has been
>observed and filmed and videotaped in both the native habitat as well as
>the captive habitat of the zoo and even the "wild animal parks"....
>
>May I suggest that you go to a PBS "Store of Knowledge" and obtain a
>copy of the National Geographic video on the Bonobos chimpanzee...
>
Well actually I am familiar with this, it is not a norm, nor is it
exclusive, that is a chimp will copulate with a female whenever
possible, studies showed no difference in the chimps reaction to
stuffed animals and other inanimate objects suitable after the chimp
is aroused. This puts it closer to masturbation than homosexuality,
and at best bi-sexuality, no study has shown male chimps with
preference for males over females for sex, it appears that if a female
is not available they will attempt to screw anything around.
BobJ.
Rattrap if you believe that an entire country or race should not be held
responsible then what do you think of this post? Pay very close
attention to herman's comment!
Re: Nazis Must Be Kept in Check- They Kill Children
> Date:
> Wed, 12 Feb 1997 16:46:44 GMT
> From:
> Hartmut...@post.rwth-aachen.de (Hartmut Schmitz)
> Organization:
> Aachen University of Technology / Rechnerbetrieb Informatik
> Newsgroups:
> soc.culture.europe, alt.revisionism, soc.history,
> soc.culture.german,
> soc.culture.nordic, talk.politics.misc,
> talk.politics.european-union
> References:
> 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6
>
> >It was thw will of the whole German Nation.
>
> >Why did you kill Anne Frank?
>
> >Herman
>
> It was not the whole German Nation!
> I did not kill Anne Frank!
>
> Think BEFORE writing such things in groups where 1000s of people read
> it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of post where Hartmut Schmitz rebukes Herman
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ] -Do you view the brutal treatment of Palestinians by Israelis as being
> ] -crimes against humanity also?
>
> Be specific... you're lumping all of Israelis into your battle... do the
> individuals who inflict the brutal treatment deserve to be tried and punished if
> found guilty? Absolutely...
I do not want to lump in the general civilian populace. Let us just say
to include the army, police, and the Shin Bet people that like to
extract confessions from people.
> ... But this isn't what we're discussing here. Don't jump off topic to bring in
> your own political agenda... I won't play your game. If I feel the need to jump
> into the ring with the Israelis and Palestinians, then I will... don't drag me
> in.
You know that the Israelis are dead wrong and you won't touch this
question. I have no agenda other than seeking truth and justice. You are
afraid of what you may have to admit when you run such as you are doing!
Don't feel too bad many on your side will not face the truth either!
> ... you have a nice day too.
You have a nice day too and I hope your conscience will let you sleep!
Lyle Scott
] -On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 04:24:20 GMT, tedd...@netcom.com (John Sanger)
] -wrote:
] -
] ->In article <3304aa1a...@Concord01.news.internex.net> b...@ezon.com (BobJ.) writes:
] ->>On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 18:57:17 GMT, rat...@delete-this-to-reply.usa.net
] ->>(RatTrap) wrote:
] ->>
] ->>>On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 06:02:24 GMT, b...@ezon.com (BobJ.) spewed the following
] ->>>dreck:
] ->>>
] ->>>] -On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
] ->>>] -wrote:
] ->>>] -
] ->>>] ->
] ->>>] ->Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
] ->>>] ->a variety of animal species.
] ->>>] ->
] ->>>] -
] ->>>] -Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
] ->>>] -same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
] ->>>] -which animals these are?
] ->>>] -
] ->>>] -I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
] ->>>] -they are.
] ->>>] -
] ->>>
] ->>>Bulls have been known to mount each other quite frequently...
] ->>>
] ->>>Hell, I've seen my dog mount another male dog... it happens...
] ->>>... you have a nice day too.
] ->>>
] ->>
] ->>Mounting? Dogs will mount anything near by, it surely can't be claimed
] ->>that this is a homosexual actions on their part. No, I am looking for
] ->>an example in nature where two, same sex animals actually have sex and
] ->>that is the "norm" for any percentage of that species?
] ->>
] ->
] ->The Bonobos chimpanzee male mounts other male Bonobos chimpanzees and
] ->achieve actual penetration and often ejaculation... This has been
] ->observed and filmed and videotaped in both the native habitat as well as
] ->the captive habitat of the zoo and even the "wild animal parks"....
] ->
] ->May I suggest that you go to a PBS "Store of Knowledge" and obtain a
] ->copy of the National Geographic video on the Bonobos chimpanzee...
] ->
] -
] -Well actually I am familiar with this, it is not a norm, nor is it
] -exclusive, that is a chimp will copulate with a female whenever
] -possible, studies showed no difference in the chimps reaction to
] -stuffed animals and other inanimate objects suitable after the chimp
] -is aroused. This puts it closer to masturbation than homosexuality,
] -and at best bi-sexuality, no study has shown male chimps with
] -preference for males over females for sex, it appears that if a female
] -is not available they will attempt to screw anything around.
] -
... if a man were to do this, would he be any less mistreated, outcast or
criticized than a homosexual?
... you have a nice day too.
RatTrap
Where did I say that Herman? See once again I show that you are a liar!
Folks below is my original posts that Herman alludes to and notice that
he even changed the title. What is out of line in my posts that would
warrant Herman calling me a Nazi and falsely saying that I said: "This
Nazi wants "Justice""?
The original post unedited:
Subject:
Are You on Record for Impartial Justice?
Date:
Fri, 14 Feb 1997 11:43:23 -0600
From:
Lyle Scott <tav...@phoenix.net>
Organization:
Phoenix DataNet
CC:
tav...@phoenix.net
Newsgroups:
can.politics, can.general, alt.politics.media,
alt.current-events.usa,
alt.politics.white-power, soc.culture.usa,
soc.culture.canada,
alt.politics.nationalism.white
References:
1 , 2 , 3 , 4
RatTrap wrote:
> As for Herman being
> obsessed with Nazism, I can't see a problem with that... anyone who is
> vehemently against crimes against humanity is doing a good job...
Lyle Scott wrote:
Are you on record for impartial justice?
If you are not then you are a hypocrite.
Do you view the brutal treatment of Palestinians by Israelis as being
crimes against humanity also? Amnesty International has documented
abuses that rival and even surpass what Nazis were accused of and tried
for.
check it out at http://www.iap.org
Lyle Scott
> RatTrap
> rattrap@usa..net
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of original post
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below is the rest of Herman's gibberish in response to the question I
asked in the above post. Lyle Scott
What did I ask that rates me a Nazi scum? Name calling is the only
answer that Herman can give to an honest and open question.
Lyle Scott
>
> Herman
>If you rationale homosexuality based on homosexual acts by animals...then you
>leave yourself open to accepting other actions of animals.
I haven't seen anyone "rationale" homosexuality on these grounds.
The reverse claim, made by anti-gay posters, has been shot down many
times, however.
This is the very definition of a "straw man."
Peace,
John Simpson
fe...@mindspring.com
http://www.mindspring.com/~feste
----------------------------------------------------
"We are men of action. Lies do not become us."
--the Dread Pirate Roberts
He would also be interested in your obsession with putting down
people who you don't know and who have never done a thing to you.
> Surely if that kind of "stuff" is good enough for MJ, it's good
> enough for the average queer!
What turns MJ on is his own business, and has no bearing on anybody
else.
> Don't you agree...
When Hell freezes over.
More than you do, it would seem.
> They're nasty things that will fuck a snake if they can get somebody
> to hold it's head!
That would explain how you came to be.
> Now, if you're telling us this because you're ranching with an old
> boar
> chimp...Man, you are you're one sick monkey fucker, you know it?
Whereas you are a healthy monkey fucker?
> The right thing for you to do is take the goddamn Chimp to Honolulu
> and marry
> it (Careful though...Don't get it confused with one of the native
> Hawaiians.
> They favor chimps a lot...but the chimps are usually smarter.)
More so than you.
> Damn Queers...next thing you know they'll want to mingle with the
> good people!
I've got news for you, dumbass: We ARE the good people.
> No! To same sex marriage (excluding male chimps, for "teddybur's"
> sake. After all, airfare to Hawaii aint cheap)
NO! to inbreeding. Look at what happens when you do.
> Chi7
Chicago 7? Puhleeeeeezz!
Whales/Dolphins
>Well actually I am familiar with this, it is not a norm, nor is it
>exclusive, that is a chimp will copulate with a female whenever
>possible, studies showed no difference in the chimps reaction to
>stuffed animals and other inanimate objects suitable after the chimp
>is aroused. This puts it closer to masturbation than homosexuality,
>and at best bi-sexuality, no study has shown male chimps with
>preference for males over females for sex, it appears that if a female
>is not available they will attempt to screw anything around.
>BobJ.
DANCE, DANCE, DANCE
The assertion about Bonobos was made in response to an
assertion that homosexuality does not appear in nature and
is therefore, by weak implication, un-natural.
ward
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The government was finally made to give a reason
for sex discrimination in marriage and it turned out...
there isn't one."
Evan Wolfson
>John Sanger wrote:
>>
>> In article <331a05b3...@nntp.netcruiser> chic...@illini.net.com writes:
>> >On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 04:24:20 GMT, tedd...@netcom.com (John Sanger) scribed:
>> >
>> >>The Bonobos chimpanzee male mounts other male Bonobos chimpanzees and
>> >>achieve actual penetration and often ejaculation... This has been
>> >That doesn't prove shit! What the hell does a goddamn chimp know...They're
>> >nasty things that will fuck a snake if they can get somebody to hold it's
>> >head!
>> >
>> >Damn Queers...next thing you know they'll want to mingle with the good people!
>> >
>>
>> Your ignorance is showing..... but I am sure you cannot tell with such a
>> low IQ, about 49 I would say from your post....
>It may not have been the most elegant post around, but it did mention
>something that has been lost by many here: that animal behaviour cannot
>be translated into being acceptable human behaviour. If you rationale
Lars -- TRY to pay attention!
You are DETERMINED to miss (evade) the point --- the reason
that animal behavior appears in this discourse at all is
because it is continually dragged in by the homophobes who
claim that homosexuality is un-natural and does not exist in
nature.
They are wrong, simply wrong -- when they are told so they
reply that the existence of homosexuality in the animal
kingdom is NO EXCUSE for human behavior.
This is a circular argument and would be utterly pointless
if some of you did not make such a point of it.
Ward
And all of these "traits" were in the society of man at one time or
another....
The point was that homosexuality is a part of nature and therefor is
natural.... it most definitely is not "against nature" to exhibit
homosexual behaviors...
Sorry but you are so full of shit it is not funny....
The Bonobos do infact seekout males to copulate with and they do it on a
daily basis...
Try getting the video and viewing it..... you just might learn something
if that is at all possible for you....
Supply the proof for this ignorant statement....
>>This is a circular argument and would be utterly pointless
>>if some of you did not make such a point of it.
>
>You still got it wrong...YOU are the one going around in circles.
>
It seems that it is you who is chasing the tail of the jackass....
clueless is as clueless does!
chicago7==clueless==ignoramus
--
I like this, Evan, Wasn't Hoover involved in
a Homosexual lifestyle..of sorts.?
And he did do his job quite well...
Had all the politicians, running for cover.
If I remember right...
************************************************************
if all the hippies -
cut off all their hair -
i don't care -
I don't care -
J.H.
************************************************************
Aneon-6.
>It was the gay bashers who were trying to make the point that
>homosexuality is unnatural because it is not found in animals. When it
>was pointed out that it does occur with animals, suddenly the
>gay-bashers want to say that proves nothing and act offended that the
>subject was raised. Totally illogical, and indicative of the fact that
>they have no justification for their position.
On the contrary they have abundant justification for their
positions --
Blind Bible reading,
Hatefulness
Prejudice
A need to look down on someone
Plain old fashioned fear of their own impulses
Deficiency of imagination
Lack of any useful notion of what love may be.
ward
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
"Love, like a mountain-wind upon an oak,
Falling upon me, shakes me leaf and bough."
Sappho of Lesbos
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
Gee, they MUST be facts. They're posted by an anonymous guy. I have real
faith in a person who refuses to link his own name to what he writes.
-Sakari Tuomisto
The scientific part is in the video of the Bonobos Chimpanzees....
>>>>This is a circular argument and would be utterly pointless
>>>>if some of you did not make such a point of it.
>
>
>>>You still got it wrong...YOU are the one going around in circles.
>
>
>>It seems that it is you who is chasing the tail of the jackass....
>
>
>Perhaps so...but we'll catch you!
>
Oh, I doubt it.... jackasses such as yourself are rather slow.....
>No scientific evidence has been presented that supports the claim by some
>homosexuality appears in nature. Therefore, a reasonable man would conclude
>that it should follow that homosexuality is un-natural. Such is generally
>accepted as a reasonable action when dealing with behavioral science.
People who really deal with behavioral science don't use terms
such as "unnatural." That is the province of bigoted armchair
psychologists who think that all gays need is a good woman.
Your conclusion is illogical, and is furthermore based on
ignorance of the facts. I can only recommend an unbiased examination
of sexual behavior in the animal kingdom. You've obviously never
owned an un-neutered male dog.
Peace,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you get a sheep to do what you want, it's because you've
guessed right." --Garrison Keillor
>Jeff McFarlane wrote:
>>
>> Anonymous (nob...@REPLAY.COM) wrote:
>> : Here are the facts about many great men in Western literature.
>>
>> : "Plato stated categorically that homosexuality (the behaviour at least)
>> : is wrong because it is unnatural --it is not something done by the
>> : animals. 'Our citizens should not be inferior to birds and many
>> : species of animals...'[21]."[r188] Homosexuality is unnatural among the
>> : animal kingdom; it is not done preferentially, or exclusively by
>> : animals.
>>
I must wonder how Plato managed to explain this to Phaedo?
Or, for that matter to Aristotle and Hertmias; also
students in the acadeny, also lovers?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Necromas [Daniel]
s33...@student.uq.edu.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
There IS an animal in the world that has homosexual relations "just
because" (or whatever it is that you people want)...
It is...
[Drum roll please..]
Humans!!!
Doh! Now really, what was all this fuss REALLY about?
chic...@illini.net.com wrote in article
<333a5389....@nntp.netcruiser>...
> On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 00:35:55 GMT, wste...@hi.net (Ward Stewart) scribed:
>
> >Lars Ormberg <la...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca> wrote:
> >
> >>John Sanger wrote:
> >>>
> >>> In article <331a05b3...@nntp.netcruiser>
chic...@illini.net.com writes:
> >>> >On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 04:24:20 GMT, tedd...@netcom.com (John Sanger)
scribed:
> >>> >
> >>> >>The Bonobos chimpanzee male mounts other male Bonobos chimpanzees
and
> >>> >>achieve actual penetration and often ejaculation... This has been
> >
> >>> >That doesn't prove shit! What the hell does a goddamn chimp
know...They're
> >>> >nasty things that will fuck a snake if they can get somebody to hold
it's
> >>> >head!
>
> >>> Your ignorance is showing..... but I am sure you cannot tell with
such a
> >>> low IQ, about 49 I would say from your post....
> >
> >>It may not have been the most elegant post around, but it did mention
> >>something that has been lost by many here: that animal behaviour cannot
> >>be translated into being acceptable human behaviour. If you rationale
> >>homosexuality based on homosexual acts by animals (which at BEST
> >>indicate bisexuality), then you leave yourself open to accepting other
> >>actions of animals. Would anybody support a man beating up another man
> >>to sleep with the other man's wife? Of course not, yet male animals
> >>will often challenge another male's claim to a herd. Would anybody
> >>support male "ownership" of large numbers of women for sexual purposes?
> >>Yet that's a common trait in social animals.
>
> >Lars -- TRY to pay attention!
> >
> >You are DETERMINED to miss (evade) the point --- the reason
> >that animal behavior appears in this discourse at all is
> >because it is continually dragged in by the homophobes who
> >claim that homosexuality is un-natural and does not exist in
> >nature.
>
> Well, don't you see that the post you responded to offers a logical
> explanation for the behavior that "YOU" want to define as "homosexuality
among
> animals". It's not homosexual behavior! You lost that one.
>
> >They are wrong, simply wrong -- when they are told so they
> >reply that the existence of homosexuality in the animal
> >kingdom is NO EXCUSE for human behavior.
>
> You're begging the question! As much as you want it to be...There is no
proof
> of "homosexuality in the animal kingdom".
>
> >This is a circular argument and would be utterly pointless
> >if some of you did not make such a point of it.
>
> You still got it wrong...YOU are the one going around in circles.
>
> Chi7
>
> > Ward
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > "The government was finally made to give a reason
> > for sex discrimination in marriage and it turned out...
> > there isn't one."
> > Evan Wolfson
>
> But there will be...Take a look at this:
>
> "The government countered that the policy was valid because it advances
the
> legitimate military goals of deterring homosexual acts, promoting unit
> cohesion, accommodating personal privacy and reducing sexual tension. The
> court agreed.
>
> The government contended that because the policy is related to advancing
> goals, it is not based on invidious prejudice, and the court agreed."
>
> ++ Federal Court ruling in SFO ( February 14, 1997) on upholding the
> discharge of a homosexual from military service.
>
Or was that point lost with all of the pointless and poorly constructed
dribble?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Necromas [Daniel]
s33...@student.uq.edu.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
RatTrap <rat...@delete-this-to-reply.usa.net> wrote in article
<3304c01c...@nntp.uunet.ca>...
> On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 18:03:37 GMT, chic...@illini.net.com spewed the
following
> dreck:
>
> ] -On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 14:18:59 GMT, rat...@delete-this-to-reply.usa.net
> ] -(RatTrap) scribed:
> ] -
> ] ->] -Now, if you're telling us this because you're ranching with an old
boar
> ] ->] -chimp...Man, you are you're one sick monkey fucker, you know it?
> ] ---
> ] ->Amazing... someone talks about the practices of a chimp somewhere out
in the
> ] ->jungle, and you immediately think that "Oh, that guys gotta be
fucking it!"
> ] ->Freud would have several comments about that.
> ] -
> ] -Freud might have found Micheal Jackson's fondness for "Chimps"
interesting
> ] -too.
>
> Actually, no... Freud wouldn't have paid much attention to that. Had
Michael
> Jackson had the tendency to constantly refer to chimps as sexual
partners,
> either for himself, or just in general, or had he had a dream about
chimps, or
> had he slipped and said "Chimp" instead of woman, Freud might have found
that
> interesting...
>
> ] -
> ] -Surely if that kind of "stuff" is good enough for MJ, it's good
enough for
> ] -the average queer!
>
> So, are you implying that:
>
> (a) Homosexuals must be fond of chimps because Michael Jackson is?
> (b) Michael Jackson has sex with chimps?
> (c) Homosexuals do whatever Michael Jackson does?
> (d) Homosexuals like to have sex with chimps?
>
> Whatever the case may be, I'd like to see where you get your
information... does
> the National Enquirer have a section specifically for bigoted morons?
>
> ... and what IS you obsession with monkeys anyway? You brought them up in
the
> first place...
>
>
> ... you have a nice day too.
>
The fundamental aspect of his teachings was homosexuality.
The first step he said was to be attracted to men.
The next steps where to have relationships of different types (ie. a
relationship with a father figure, a relationship with someone with an
opposite personality to you...)
The final step was to have a relationship with wisdom (or to be wise).
From what Plato said about Socrates (who was to Plato a man who had
achieved enlightenment) it seems that wisdom means try to get some sex
when-ever you can, stay friendly, but DONT get in a relationship.
These are all my own inferences and conclusions, of course...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Necromas [Daniel]
s33...@student.uq.edu.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
John Sanger <tedd...@netcom.com> wrote in article
<teddybur...@netcom.com>...
> In article <3302adc0...@Concord01.news.internex.net> b...@ezon.com
(BobJ.) writes:
> >On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed
fact among
> >>a variety of animal species.
> >>
> >
> >Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
> >same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
> >which animals these are?
> >
> >I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
> >they are.
> >
>
> The Bonobos chimpanzee is one..... a very homosexual active one.....
>No scientific evidence has been presented that supports the claim by some
>homosexuality appears in nature. Therefore, a reasonable man would conclude
>that it should follow that homosexuality is un-natural. Such is generally
>accepted as a reasonable action when dealing with behavioral science.
I spend all of *ten* minutes surfing the web this morning.
Here is a short list of documentation regarding scientific
evidence of homosexuality in nature among non-humans. I'm
sure if I actually spent a little more than ten minutes, I'd
find a lot more citations. I do want to find a reference for
the pair of male geese that appeared to have pair-bonded the
way that opposite sex geese do. I'll let you know when I
find it.
An aside to BobJ. It seems that you are more than passing
familiar with the behaviour of the Bonobo. Why then did you
call for references of homosexuality among animals when you
already knew about some?
Further, since there also exists a great deal of scientific
evidence for homosexuality among humans, your statement that
homosexuality is unnatural is false on the face of it.
John Liesch
Agar, M.E. & Mitchell, G., 1975
Behavior of free-ranging rhesus adults: a review.
In Bourne, G. (Ed.) The Rhesus Monkey (Vol. I, Chapter 8).
New York:
Academic Press, pp. 323-342
Carpenter, C. R., 1942
Sexual behaviour of free-ranging rhesus monkeys (Macaca
mulatta). II:
Periodicity of estrus, homosexual, autoerotic and
nonconformist behavior
J COMPARATIVE PSYCH. 33: 143-162
Dagg, A. I., 1984
Homosexual behaviour and female-male mounting in mammals - a
first survey.
MAMMAL. REV. 14(4): 155-185
Edwards, A-M. A. R. & Todd, J. D., 1991
Homosexual behaviour in wild white-handed gibbons (Hylobates
lar)
PRIMATES 32(2): 231-236
Erwin, J. & Maple, T., 1976
Ambisexual behavior with male-male anal penetration in male
rhesus monkeys.
ARCH. SEXUAL BEHAV. 5(1): 9-14
Fairbanks, L. & McGuire, M., 1977
Homosexual behavior and female aggression in rhesus
macaques.
Paper presented at the Western Psychological Association
meeting, Seattle,
Washington, April.
Fox, G. S., 1977
Social dynamics in siamang.
Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.
Goy, R. W. & Goldfoot, D. A. 1975
Neuroendocrinology: animal models and problems of human
sexuality
ARCH. SEXUAL BEHAV. 4(4): 405-420.
Kling, A. & Dunne, K., 1976
Social-environmental factors affecting behavior and plasma
testosterone in
normal and amygdala lesioned M. speciosa
PRIMATES 17(1): 23-42
Kuroda, S., 1980
Social behaviour of the pygmy chimpanzee
PRIMATES 21: 181-197
van Lawick-Goodall, J., 1968
The behaviour of free-living chimpanzees in the Gombe Stream
reserve
ANIM. BEHAV. MONOGR. 1(3): 161-311
Yamagiwa, J., 1987
Intra- and inter-group interactions of an all-male group of
Virunga
Mountain gorillas (Gorilla gorilla berengei)
PRIMATES 28: 1-30
>In article <3302adc0...@Concord01.news.internex.net> b...@ezon.com (BobJ.) writes:
>>On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
>>>a variety of animal species.
>>>
>>
>>Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
>>same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
>>which animals these are?
>>
>>I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
>>they are.
>>
>The Bonobos chimpanzee is one..... a very homosexual active one.....
>--
>Ciao!
> John S. 8^{)>
> tedd...@netcom.com
>__
yea but which sex would he choose
if given the choice of male or female?
if you live in an unnatural all male state ,you would have sexual
activity between males
but what about in a population of 50% male/ female?
seems fags are unatural plato is rite
>On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 18:57:17 GMT, rat...@delete-this-to-reply.usa.net
>(RatTrap) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 06:02:24 GMT, b...@ezon.com (BobJ.) spewed the following
>>dreck:
>>
>>] -On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
>>] -wrote:
>>] -
>>] ->
>>] ->Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
>>] ->a variety of animal species.
>>] ->
>>] -
>>] -Just out of interest sake, which animals are the ones that engage in
>>] -same sex activity? I have seen this stated before, but never seen
>>] -which animals these are?
>>] -
>>] -I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just interested in which
>>] -they are.
>>] -
>>
>>Bulls have been known to mount each other quite frequently...
>>
>>Hell, I've seen my dog mount another male dog... it happens...
>>... you have a nice day too.
>>
>>RatTrap
>>rattrap@usa..net
>>
>
>Mounting? Dogs will mount anything near by, it surely can't be claimed
>that this is a homosexual actions on their part. No, I am looking for
>an example in nature where two, same sex animals actually have sex and
>that is the "norm" for any percentage of that species?
Why can't it be claimed to be a homosexual act, Bob? Because it
disagrees with your bullshit? Or do you just have something against
dogs?
>
>Waiting, thanks - BobJ.
Wait a bit longer, idiot. Maybe your god will come and take you
away.
=Bob
> >You are DETERMINED to miss (evade) the point --- the reason
> >that animal behavior appears in this discourse at all is
> >because it is continually dragged in by the homophobes who
> >claim that homosexuality is un-natural and does not exist in
> >nature.
> Well, don't you see that the post you responded to offers a logical
> explanation for the behavior that "YOU" want to define as "homosexuality among
> animals". It's not homosexual behavior! You lost that one.
Unfortunately, the "explanation" (loss of sense of smell and brain
damage) is a lie. Animals have homosexual sex. Some animals have a
preferential bias towards sex with their own gender. Homosexuality is
therefore as "natural" or "unnatural" as heterosexuality. If you want to
discourse on the constructed nature of human sexual identity, go ahead -
but you'll be condemning heterosexuality as well as homosexuality.
- Tony Q.
--
"The weapon, like anything else, could only finally be judged by the
effect it had on others, by the consequences it produced in some outside
context, by its place in the rest of the universe. By this measure the
love, or just the appreciation, of weapons was a kind of tragedy." - IB
** On 13 Feb 1997 02:34:08 GMT, an...@chebucto.ns.ca (Jeff McFarlane)
** wrote:
*** Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual
*** activity is an observed fact among
*** a variety of animal species.
** Just out of interest sake, which animals are
** the ones that engage in same sex activity? I have
** seen this stated before, but never seen
** which animals these are?
> It has been observed in a number of species, mostly occuring when there
> is a population of male-only animals. I have only seen it firsthand in
> rats, both male-male and female-female. Basically, they will mount each
> other and go through the motions. I doubt there is any kind of
> penetration going on (rats haven't invented K-Y yet), but it is
> definitely sexual in nature.
Ok, we have that documented. It happens with dogs and monkeys and rats,
etc. Now we must accomplish a great leap. Just what do rats isolated
by sex for a week "going through the motions" of instinctive muscle
movements have to do with condoning activities such as same-sex marriage
among humans? Seems to me a better analogy would be seeing segregated
men and women engaged in same-sex dancing in a social setting (or a
ritual setting). Or perhaps a compasionate plea could be made for those
who are indeed isolated for rat-weeks. BTW, how long is a rat-week? five
or ten years?
I did not put forward either the claim homosexual sex acts were
natural or not, nor did state that it is seen in nature or not. I
merely asked in what animals the poster was referring and when given
dogs as an example, I did not agree. The Monkey's may be a better
example.
You would have to be almost as stupid as you sound to use examples in
nature for range of activity people do, animals don't read, drive,
write, or build machines, or tie their fucking shoes for as much as it
relates to human sexuality.
All sides of the base argument are just too plain stupid to
participate in, I was just interested in what animals were being
referred to.
So you can take your ever-ready righteous indignation and shove it!
BobJ.
It seems that you should view the videotapes on the Bonobos.....
>
>seems fags are unatural plato is rite
>
Sorry but he just did not say that.....
clueless is as clueless does!
dkenterp==clueless==ignoramus
}The right thing for you to do is take the goddamn Chimp to Honolulu and marry
}it (Careful though...Don't get it confused with one of the native Hawaiians.
}They favor chimps a lot...but the chimps are usually smarter.)
Fie! Why limit it to chimps? I'm certain that some people would like
sheep. (Remind me to post the heter-sheep-fucker article some time.)
Others might like swans. The more aquatic members of humanity might
prefer dolphins of octopus. There are *many* possibilities!
(Now let's see if that was too high-brow for him.)
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
The difference between theory and practice is bigger in practice than in
theory
Cute post, Frozer. Did you get a chimp to type it for you? Is a
coherent sentence too much to ask? Huh? You pathetic loser. Bigoted
hatemongers are one thing, but ILLITERATE bigoted hatemongers? The line
must be drawn somewhere. Maybe somewhere in your own trailer, Frozer?
Where I'm guessing you've lived with your mother for the last 35 years.
Am I right?
Please don't bother trying to out-insult me. I'm sure I could not muster
the effort to try and decipher another of your random typeset patterns
which (barely) pass as garbled crap.
"Oink like a pig!"
-Sakari Tuomisto
] -Didn't they prove (irrecoverably) a point at one stage or another?
] -
] -Or was that point lost with all of the pointless and poorly constructed
] -dribble?
] -
I'm afraid I have no idea what you're talking about... can you please use
references when you write? I made several points in my previous message, so I
don't know which point you are referring to.
... you have a nice day too.
RatTrap
rattrap@usa..net
--------------------------------------------------------
] -RatTrap wrote:
] ->
] -> On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 11:43:23 -0600, Lyle Scott <tav...@phoenix.net> spewed the
] -> following dreck:
] ->
] -> ] -RatTrap wrote:
] -> ] -> As for Herman being
] -> ] -> obsessed with Nazism, I can't see a problem with that... anyone who is
] -> ] -> vehemently against crimes against humanity is doing a good job...
] ->
] -> ] - Are you on record for impartial justice?
] -> ] - If you are not then you are a hypocrite.
] ->
] -> Ahh... that's a trap I'm not falling into. It depends on your definition of
] -> impartial justice...
] ->
] -> If you mean that I feel that people should be punished for their crimes?
] -> Absolutely...
] ->
] -> If you mean that an entire country or race of people should be held accountable
] -> for their government, or a specific groups' actions? No, I do not.
] -
] -Rattrap if you believe that an entire country or race should not be held
] -responsible then what do you think of this post? Pay very close
] -attention to herman's comment!
] -
[- Clipped ... Wanna read it? Then go back in the thread -]
And so I read it... what relevance does this have to my comment? I still think
that an entire country or race should not be held accountable for their
governments, or specific groups' actions. If the contrary were true, we'd all be
guilty of some offense. You're American? You killed complete tribes of Native
Americans... off to jail with you. Christian? Off with your head for the
Borgia's and the Spanish Inquisition. Spanish? Sorry... for the destruction of
the Incas, off to the gallows...
] -
] -> ] -Do you view the brutal treatment of Palestinians by Israelis as being
] -> ] -crimes against humanity also?
] ->
] -> Be specific... you're lumping all of Israelis into your battle... do the
] -> individuals who inflict the brutal treatment deserve to be tried and punished if
] -> found guilty? Absolutely...
] -
] -I do not want to lump in the general civilian populace. Let us just say
] -to include the army, police, and the Shin Bet people that like to
] -extract confessions from people.
You seem more than eager to include the general civilian populace. The term
Israeli is a very large one, and covers millions of people who play no part
other than that they are innocent bystanders. The Chinese Government has
commited several human rights offenses... but to say that the Chinese are human
rights offenders is incorrect... the students that were killed at Tienamen
Square are Chinese, and I would confidently say that they don't fall under the
title of human rights offenders.
] -
] -> ... But this isn't what we're discussing here. Don't jump off topic to bring in
] -> your own political agenda... I won't play your game. If I feel the need to jump
] -> into the ring with the Israelis and Palestinians, then I will... don't drag me
] -> in.
] -
] -You know that the Israelis are dead wrong and you won't touch this
] -question. I have no agenda other than seeking truth and justice. You are
] -afraid of what you may have to admit when you run such as you are doing!
] -Don't feel too bad many on your side will not face the truth either!
Like I said... I'm not being pulled into the ring... Your agenda is to drag
enemies and allies into your playground so that you can have a tiny battle. My
stand on the issues you have brought up is well defined... I am not afraid to
admit my beliefs, but I am not here to debate them or bring them up against my
will... I could throw the words "Racism", "Abortion", "Euthanasia", etc... into
this pile, as they're all hot topics to discuss, but they are not the topic at
hand.
] -> ... you have a nice day too.
] -
] -You have a nice day too and I hope your conscience will let you sleep!
] -Lyle Scott
My conscience is clear as a bell...
This man uses his energy and effort devoted towards hating Jews, Blacks,
Homosexuals and the usual Master Race agenda.
This behavior does not lend itself to good mental health.
He himself is a very weak character. But cannot excersize self control.
Herman
>chic...@illini.net.com said:
>}The right thing for you to do is take the goddamn Chimp to Honolulu and marry
>}it (Careful though...Don't get it confused with one of the native Hawaiians.
>}They favor chimps a lot...but the chimps are usually smarter.)
Aloha "Chicago"
Why don't you drop by yourself and bring this message to the
Hawaiians yourself?
ward
One of the odd drawbacks of this media is that anonymous
posters are able to open up their festering cess-pits of
minds and expose their racism and hate to the world.
disgusting stuff!
ward
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"There is no better tool with which to pound plowshares
into swords than the bible.
J. A. Stanley
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Like I said... I'm not being pulled into the ring... Your agenda is to drag
> enemies and allies into your playground so that you can have a tiny battle.
That is not my agenda but I will not argue. You gave a noble and
acceptable answer! You are at least sincere! I thought that you were
trying to be a "wise guy". Your view is well taken.
Scott
> My
> stand on the issues you have brought up is well defined... I am not afraid to
> admit my beliefs, but I am not here to debate them or bring them up against my
> will... I could throw the words "Racism", "Abortion", "Euthanasia", etc... into
> this pile, as they're all hot topics to discuss, but they are not the topic at
> hand.
> ... you have a nice day too.
>
> RatTrap
> rattrap@usa..net
Your bigoty, hatred and ignorance is showing.... but then someone with
an IQ of 49 and a mental age of 6 years cannot be expected to
demonstrate intelligence.....
clueless is as clueless does!
frozeropada==clueless==ignoramus
Sorry, "matey". I was laughing my arse off as I replied to your message.
That is a cute little saying you've got out there. Nothing quite so
philosophically inspiring as farm animals, huh Frozer?
-Sakari "Duelling Banjos" Tuomisto
froze...@adaka.net.com wrote in article
<331d1707...@nntp.netcruiser>...
>
>
> These freaks are brain dead, Bob. They're old "8 tracks" all playing the
same
> tape. Boring, boring people.
>
> You got to think that they all live in the same trailer and have a script
that
> they pass around in the middle of the night so that everyone has the
"catch
> phrase" of the day by 6AM.
>
> The same shit get flung on the screen by every cocksucker who can gets
his
> hand off his boyfriend's dick long enough to punch the keys for a while.
>
> A big bag of fuckface loser these queer bastards are. Maybe we can
generate
> electricity with them. They've got to be good for something...
>
> Frozer
>
Sad, sad, sad...Don't we learn anything from history? Did'nt
WWII show us that hateful biggoted authoritarian assholes
LOSE in the end? When we are socialized from birth that being
Gay, Homosexual, whatever is abhorrent, do you really think we
want this stigma as a "lifestyle" - most assuredly not. But each human
being is
unique, and by the genetic luck of the draw, there are some of
us whom happen to be attracted to the same sex. We are Doctors, Preachers,
Engineers, Janitors, etc, etc. We help the wheels of society run - and all
we want is to live our lives without being called wrong, different, evil.
aside from sexuality, we are just like everyone else. The nazi-like hatred
tactics will not work.
So heil hitler, have a nice day, and remember who LOST the
war (with murder and blood on thier hands that will never be forgotten).
Would anybody
> support male "ownership" of large numbers of women for sexual purposes?
King Solomon comes to mind.
--
John
NOTE: "From" address is deliberately wrong.
My correct e-mail address is:
> Please save yourself time and effort, old guy, and don't issue you usual weak
> response.
> Chi7
When you choose to identify yourself with your real name rather
than hide behind "chicago7," then perhaps your comments might
be considered something more than weak, if not worthless.
You gays who think to make yourselves acceptable in society by insulting
anyone who disagrees with you are many times misguided. You who argue with
me by insulting my sentance structure because of it's difficulty might want
to consider how this arguement impugns your own position.
You gays are welcome to breed yourselves to death (may your offspring be
scanty!), with no complaints from civilised males who courteously
refrain from animalistic acts like killing other males to possess their
females. We would prefer not to watch you struggle unsucessfully with the
challenges of life (and don't think that intellectualism and property are
any measure of real success). Likewise we refrain from aping acts of
domination designed to intimidate competitors for procreation, aleady cited
in this thread. But don't think you will survive for long when a real man
(or woman) catches you molesting his children.
You sons who are lost to your fathers will inherit nothing but extinction
and sorrow. Shame is upon you!
Solitary masturbation is more acceptable a safty valve than some other
practices possible but more repugnant, even if it is one step towards the
slippery slope. (Please forgive any unfortunate idiom.) I would prefer not
having some of these ideas even mentioned in my society.
Why should gays expect to gain the respect of 'normal' people when they
advertise acts which are disgusting to us? Go, conduct you perversions in
private, I will not condemn you, only pity. The more you stay in each
other's circles, the more women there be for those of us who feel nature's
urge to breed! You will note that there are many more gay men than women,
which reinforces my suspicion that women are mentally stronger than men.
If God in his mercy allows you to live as an example of depravity to be
avoided, or otherwise, then I cannot criticise his purpose. Yet I pray
that you decline in population sooner rather than later, for your own sake,
to limit the suffering you cause and feel.
Do gays think that if they can find animals that do what they do
that it is any less bestial, or base? I hope that man's destiny is to rise
above the beasts.
Again I say that I believe homosexuality is a response to a world too
difficult for some to survive, or possibly is nature's way of controlling
population, as is natural death by old age. My homosexual sister in law
has a discerning heart broken by the violent death of the one man she
finally found acceptable, a fine young dutiful english soldier killed by an
irishman so out of control that he could not contain his urge to violence.
No wonder her urge to breed has died too. She is noble but broken. Can she
be healed? She has my respect. Some are broken, but not noble, some by
mental insufficiency, some who's nobility was usurped, broken by perverted
intent and molestation; murdered.
My first response to this thread was a response to a disgusting quotation
reading in part "..we [gays] will seduce [your sons] in the locker rooms.."
passed off later by one who claimed defence in that it was "A joke..written
tongue in cheek". Fool! Even if it was, it is now gospel to some who
might otherwise never have considered it. Now there are some who believe
their mission is to seduce the world! 15 years ago, while visiting T.O., I
met a 'man' at the next table in a restraunt who was convinced it would
only be another few months before this conspiracy and revolution conquered
the world. When I attempted to remove my family to a distant table, I was
accosted by this wierd creature, who was angry that I did not agree with
him! I still feel soiled by his touch. He was chased out of the restraunt
in shame, by a waitress more inclined to violence than I, and I suspect as
disgusted by my conduct in not thrashing him than by his.
Live and let live has been my policy, but I cannot force this upon anyone,
would that I could. There may come a time when a revolution does indeed
come. I believe, as my dear departed mother told me, that the pendulum of
society swings, and that some times it swings too far, but that it always
swings back. Beware pumping it too far! Be satisfied with a little
tolerance, don't demand too much. There is an overwhelming great many
decent, quiet people who will protest when their sensibilities are
eventually piqued.
In article <332665b5...@nntp.netcruiser>,
chic...@illini.net.com wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Feb 1997 20:52:53 GMT, wste...@hi.net (Ward Stewart) scribed:
>
>>
>>>chic...@illini.net.com said:
>>
>>>}The right thing for you to do is take the goddamn Chimp to Honolulu and
marry
>>>}it (Careful though...Don't get it confused with one of the native
Hawaiians.
>>>}They favor chimps a lot...but the chimps are usually smarter.)
>>
>>Aloha "Chicago"
>>
>>Why don't you drop by yourself and bring this message to the
>>Hawaiians yourself?
>>
>>ward
>
>
>Well, Oji-san...I did that for seven years but the stupid bastards never
>understood. If there is anything on the face of this earth that's less
>intelligent than a full dressed coconut, I haven't heard of it.
But today? Aren't we cracking down on pimps?
> --
> John
>
> NOTE: "From" address is deliberately wrong.
> My correct e-mail address is:
>
> desa...@monitor.net
--
Lars Ormberg
(I don't know where Mr. T lives. Stop phoning my home)
la...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
__
The Commodore's webpage is bigger, badder, and more Java-packed than
ever before! Take a tour at http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/ and have
an experience only categorizable as Lars On-Line!
* The Borg--our most lethal enemy--have begun an invasion of the
Federation. The assimilation continues...STAR TREK:FIRST CONTACT is
still showing in theatres across the country. (Oh, and some Star Wars
thing is supposedly on as well. Like anybody cares).
> > Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
> > a variety of animal species.
Where are the studies that show this to be so? How long has this been
observed? And in what animals? Is this common behavior or something to a
particular situation or area?
Just wanting info.
Oze
] -grea...@mindspring.com wrote:
] ->
] -> Lyle Scott wrote:
] -> >
] -> This Nazi wants "Justice"
] -
] -Where did I say that Herman? See once again I show that you are a liar!
Actually, I didn't read it that way at all... it looks like Herman wrote it as a
title to his message... I think you're way off base here.
] -
] -Folks below is my original posts that Herman alludes to and notice that
] -he even changed the title. What is out of line in my posts that would
] -warrant Herman calling me a Nazi and falsely saying that I said: "This
] -Nazi wants "Justice""?
If you notice the quote markers, it doesn't look like Herman did anything of the
sort. Yes, he changed the title, but so what? It happens all the time... no harm
there... and then he started his message with his own comment, which happened to
call you a Nazi... I read nothing that says that he misquoted anything you
typed.
[- Clipped ... If you want to read it, do what I did, go back into the thread -]
... you have a nice day too.
RatTrap
rattrap@usa..net
--------------------------------------------------------
] -Boy oh Boy!
] -What a bunch of raving faggots and rednecks!
] -You people should knock off the helium for a while, and listen to
] -yourselves!
Terry, you sheltered Maritimer and raving bigot... maybe you should listen to
yourself before ranting...
] -You gays who think to make yourselves acceptable in society by insulting
] -anyone who disagrees with you are many times misguided. You who argue with
] -me by insulting my sentance structure because of it's difficulty might want
] -to consider how this arguement impugns your own position.
The homosexuals in our society only desire to live their life much as we do.
Their private life is just that, private. It's rantings and ravings from a
homophobe such as yourself that force people who are homosexual fight back. Do
you expect people (regardless of race, color, or sexual preference) to just
stand there while people call them "disease spreaders", "scourge of society", or
stalk and beat them? Homosexuality has been around since the dawn of time...
] -You gays are welcome to breed yourselves to death (may your offspring be
] -scanty!), with no complaints from civilised males who courteously
] -refrain from animalistic acts like killing other males to possess their
] -females.
I can't even comment on such a ludicrous statement... I'll just leave it there
for INTELLIGENT people to laugh at.
] -We would prefer not to watch you struggle unsucessfully with the
] -challenges of life (and don't think that intellectualism and property are
] -any measure of real success).
Actually... we would prefer not to see ANYONE struggle unsuccessfully with the
challenges of life. It's because of ill-informed people such as yourself that
these people FACE these challenges. Now, you say that intellectualism and
property are not a valid measure of success... then what is? Family? I know a
few homosexual couples that are raising a family as we speak... quite
successfully. Career? Several homosexuals are holding top level positions in
companies these days. Why, for all I know, my boss could be gay... 1 in 10
people are homosexual or bi-sexual...
] -Likewise we refrain from aping acts of
] -domination designed to intimidate competitors for procreation, aleady cited
] -in this thread.
We do? Heterosexual men refrain from acting macho to intimidate competitors for
sex? What color is the sky in your world? We heterosexuals practically INVENTED
it!
] -But don't think you will survive for long when a real man
] -(or woman) catches you molesting his children.
Oh... so they all child molesters now? You know... an interesting statistic to
point out is that the typical profile for a child molester is White,
Heterosexual, Male, aged 25-45...
] -You sons who are lost to your fathers will inherit nothing but extinction
] -and sorrow. Shame is upon you!
... and with close-minded attitudes such as this, my sympathy is with them. Any
father who disowns his son because of something he cannot control shouldn't be
allowed the privilege of the title "father"...
] -Solitary masturbation is more acceptable a safty valve than some other
] -practices possible but more repugnant, even if it is one step towards the
] -slippery slope. (Please forgive any unfortunate idiom.) I would prefer not
] -having some of these ideas even mentioned in my society.
Then don't listen! I don't ask to hear about your heterosexual practices, and I
don't care to listen to them.
] -Why should gays expect to gain the respect of 'normal' people when they
] -advertise acts which are disgusting to us?
Normal people? Who, you? I am a straight male, wife, kid, house, car, job.
Typical for today's society, and people like you embarass me... You're far from
normal in MOST people's eyes. As for advertising acts which are disgusting to
you... maybe you should look in your own backyard before you condemn you
neighbor for the mess in his... television, newspapers and magazines are PACKED
with Telephone sex lines, escort services, massage services, etc... most of
which are aimed at the heterosexual male... movies that gain popularity because
it's got some smut in it are all over the place (Striptease, Showgirls, etc...)
] -Go, conduct you perversions in
] -private, I will not condemn you, only pity. The more you stay in each
] -other's circles, the more women there be for those of us who feel nature's
] -urge to breed!
Yeah, that's it... all those homosexuals having sex in the streets are a real
nuisance! Man, they're everywhere!
] -You will note that there are many more gay men than women,
] -which reinforces my suspicion that women are mentally stronger than men.
Really? Where DO you get your facts? The number of gay men to gay women is
pretty equal. As a matter of fact, I know more lesbians than I do gay men...
] -If God in his mercy allows you to live as an example of depravity to be
] -avoided, or otherwise, then I cannot criticise his purpose. Yet I pray
] -that you decline in population sooner rather than later, for your own sake,
] -to limit the suffering you cause and feel.
Oooh... nice touch... try to blame it all on God! Tell you what... you let your
God sort out who he likes, and who he dislikes, and you go about your
business... but don't be surprised if you're on his "dislike" list... isn't
there a line in the Bible that says "Do unto others, as you would have done unto
yourself"
] -Do gays think that if they can find animals that do what they do
] -that it is any less bestial, or base? I hope that man's destiny is to rise
] -above the beasts.
Some men have... we're still waiting for you to catch up.
] -Again I say that I believe homosexuality is a response to a world too
] -difficult for some to survive, or possibly is nature's way of controlling
] -population, as is natural death by old age. My homosexual sister in law
] -has a discerning heart broken by the violent death of the one man she
] -finally found acceptable, a fine young dutiful english soldier killed by an
] -irishman so out of control that he could not contain his urge to violence.
] -No wonder her urge to breed has died too. She is noble but broken. Can she
] -be healed? She has my respect.
Homosexuality being "a response to a world too difficult for some to survive" is
quite a bizarre statement, being that most of the pain and suffering that a
homosexual has to accept in his world comes at the hands of frightened
heterosexual men who can't face truth and reality in the world...
As for your Bisexual sister-in-law... have you ever asked her if she's happy
with women? Very few people in this world chase misery, and if she finds herself
attracted to women, and that makes her happy, then why say that she needs to be
"healed"?
] -Some are broken, but not noble, some by
] -mental insufficiency, some who's nobility was usurped, broken by perverted
] -intent and molestation; murdered.
As mentioned before... maybe you should look at who's doing the molesting and
murdering before you point fingers...
] -My first response to this thread was a response to a disgusting quotation
] -reading in part "..we [gays] will seduce [your sons] in the locker rooms.."
] -passed off later by one who claimed defence in that it was "A joke..written
] -tongue in cheek". Fool! Even if it was, it is now gospel to some who
] -might otherwise never have considered it. Now there are some who believe
] -their mission is to seduce the world!
And Hitler was an Austrian who thought that the Aryan race should rule the
world... should we ostracize all Austrians because of one man's act?
] - 15 years ago, while visiting T.O., I
] -met a 'man' at the next table in a restraunt who was convinced it would
] -only be another few months before this conspiracy and revolution conquered
] -the world. When I attempted to remove my family to a distant table, I was
] -accosted by this wierd creature, who was angry that I did not agree with
] -him! I still feel soiled by his touch. He was chased out of the restraunt
] -in shame, by a waitress more inclined to violence than I, and I suspect as
] -disgusted by my conduct in not thrashing him than by his.
Recently, on the internet, I came across several people who was convinced that
the people who didn't follow their own beliefs are abnormal, murdering
molesters, or that they are disease spreaders, or that they should stay in their
own circle. The world was accosted with the ramblings of these wierd creatures,
who were angry that the world didn't agree with them. The world is still soiled
by their presence...
] -Live and let live has been my policy, but I cannot force this upon anyone,
] -would that I could.
This comment is so ass-backwards it's laughable... if your policy is "Live and
let live" then you wouldn't have typed your original message...
] -There may come a time when a revolution does indeed
] -come. I believe, as my dear departed mother told me, that the pendulum of
] -society swings, and that some times it swings too far, but that it always
] -swings back. Beware pumping it too far! Be satisfied with a little
] -tolerance, don't demand too much. There is an overwhelming great many
] -decent, quiet people who will protest when their sensibilities are
] -eventually piqued.
The homosexual society isn't asking for the world to become homosexual...
they're asking to be left alone... to be accepted into society as human beings
who are just as productive, creative, intelligent, and HUMAN as the rest of us.
You say "be satisfied with a little tolerence"... WHY??? They have as much right
to live a normal life as you do. You don't see people ostracizing or berating
you for YOUR sexual preference, do you? I've never heard of bands of homosexuals
going out on a hunt to do some "Straight-bashing" ... I've never heard of
straight people being called disease spreaders because of Syphilis, another
sexually transmitted disease that can kill... and I've yet to hear a sensible
argument as to why a person should be persecuted based on sexual preference, or
why should it should even be an issue ...
Maybe we should be persecuting ignorant people instead...
] -No, I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything but I always read in
] -this, and other newsgroups, that
] -
] -> > Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
] -> > a variety of animal species.
] -
] -Where are the studies that show this to be so? How long has this been
] -observed? And in what animals? Is this common behavior or something to a
] -particular situation or area?
] -
] -Just wanting info.
] -
] -Oze
Read back through the thread, Oze... this topic has been covered in depth...
] -> Herman
] -
] -I examine the manner of the debate and conduct. I know who is
] -telling the truth and who is lying by the tactics employed-
] -the liar always attacks the opposing person.
] - -- Scott aka Doc Tavish <tav...@phoenix.net>
Scott... this mindless repetition is getting tedious...
It's very similar to a young child sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling
"La la la la la ... I can't hear you... la la la la..."
It was written by Michael Swift, in the Gay Community News, in Feb. of
1987.
It was a satirical piece intended to show how absurd the claims of a gay
agenda
to destroy heterosexual society are. Unfortunately, idiots like the one
who
began this thread seem to take it at face value and proclaim it as
"proof" of
the gay agenda. Read the piece and tell me if it doesn't seem rather
silly.
> Fool!
I'm not the one proclaiming Jeff Voss as the savior of heterosexual
society.
> Even if it was, it is now gospel to some who might otherwise never have
> considered it.
Then "some" are in for a for a big surprise.
How exactly are people "better" than animals? Certainly we are different
from
the other species that inhabit this world, but don't forget that we have
a bit
of the animal in ourselves. What we need is not to be "better than an
animal"
but rather to be what God made us. The purpose in pointing out the
existence
of homosexual acts in nature was to refute the "unnatural" claim
regarding
homosexuality. That a thing occurs in nature does not imply that it is
good or
bad. per se.
> > My first response to this thread was a response to a disgusting quotation
> > reading in part "..we [gays] will seduce [your sons] in the locker rooms.."
> > passed off later by one who claimed defence in that it was "A joke..written
> > tongue in cheek". Fool!
>
> If that's the kind of jokes gays find funny (including I suppose Ashley
> McIssac's urinating comments in MacLeans), then add another lifestyle
> complaint.
Myself, I think that it was stupid, but that's me. I guess that Michael
Swift gave
the general public too much credit for having the brains to understand
that it
was a joke, albeit a foolish one. As far as "lifestyle complaints" go,
gays
certainly don't have a monopoly on foolish or tasteless humor. I could
make a
similar complaint about heteros based on some of the jokes I've heard.
I examine the manner of the debate and conduct. I know who is
telling the truth and who is lying by the tactics employed- the liar
always attacks the opposing person.
Apparently it's fallen by the wayside. Is "no better than an animal"
even an insult anymore?
> My first response to this thread was a response to a disgusting quotation
> reading in part "..we [gays] will seduce [your sons] in the locker rooms.."
> passed off later by one who claimed defence in that it was "A joke..written
> tongue in cheek". Fool!
If that's the kind of jokes gays find funny (including I suppose Ashley
McIssac's urinating comments in MacLeans), then add another lifestyle
complaint.
--
> >King Solomon comes to mind.
> >
> >--
> >John
>
> >desa...@monitor.net
>
> This will come as a suprise to ward steward and john sanger...they claim that
> Solomon was a queer.
Or perhaps he was bisexual, not wanting to leave out anyone.
In ancient times, it was not unknown for men of wealth and
position in society to keep a wife (or wives) as possessions and
to make babies (heirs); and to keep older boys and young men
as their lovers.
Mssrs. Stewart and Sanger are probably quite aware of that.
>On Tue, 18 Feb 1997 06:43:03 -0800, des...@monitor.net (John De Salvio)
>scribed:
>>In article <3304AF...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>, la...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca wrote:
>>
>>
>>Would anybody
>>> support male "ownership" of large numbers of women for sexual purposes?
>>
>>King Solomon comes to mind.
>>
>>--
>>John
>This will come as a suprise to ward steward and john sanger...they claim that
>Solomon was a queer.
NOTHING in the babble comes to me as a surprise, NOTHING!
The only surprise is the excessive gullability of the true
believers.
ward
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of an eye, the more light you
shed upon it, the more it contracts." -Oliver Wendell Holmes
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Supply the post wherein I stated that Solomon was homosexual..... or be
branded the LIAR that you are....
>> Well, Plato was wrong then. Same sex sexual activity is an observed fact among
>> a variety of animal species.
Yes, but not willingly. It is primarially used to exert or establish
dominance within the group - not exactly a consentual activity.
> You can talk with the pigs, boy...but you better shut up and listen to the
> BULL!
Hey, man. It's your call.
I admire a man who admits his own posts are BULL.
How many other natural (because some animals do it occasionally) acts
are you planning to justify with this logic?
--
Lars Ormberg
(I don't know where Mr. T lives. Stop phoning my home)
la...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
____
It's been done! The awesome website of The Commodore has been given
an upgrade! More animations! More Java! More Klingons! Take another
look at http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/ and then you will finally have
an experience that can truly be declared Lars On-Line!
* The Borg--our most lethal enemy--have begun an invasion of the
Federation. The assimilation continues...STAR TREK:FIRST CONTACT is
still showing in theatres across the country, resistance is still not
futile! Paramount Pictures brings the treachery of a Queen, the
courage of a captain, and the destiny of a planet. (Oh, and some Star
Wars special edition thing is supposedly on as well. I hear it doesn't
entirely suck).
> Hatefulness
Not always a bad thing
> Prejudice
Not always a bad thing
> A need to look down on someone
Only on those who are lower
> Plain old fashioned fear of their own impulses
Intelligence to understand that impulses aren't always right
- "Just because we can do something, does not necessarily mean that
we must." -- Federation president, presiding over the Khitomer
conference
> Deficiency of imagination
I can imagine a lot. Doesn't mean people should do it.
> Lack of any useful notion of what love may be.
Useful notion of love? I suppose you forget the types of common
homosexual behaviours such as consuming of feces.
> ward
Now now now. Let's play the individual versus group game again.
Name the gay basher who posted the first comment.
I'll name the gay basher who mentioned its irrational justification: me.
> ] -Well actually I am familiar with this, it is not a norm, nor is it
> ] -exclusive, that is a chimp will copulate with a female whenever
> ] -possible, studies showed no difference in the chimps reaction to
> ] -stuffed animals and other inanimate objects suitable after the chimp
> ] -is aroused. This puts it closer to masturbation than homosexuality,
> ] -and at best bi-sexuality, no study has shown male chimps with
> ] -preference for males over females for sex, it appears that if a female
> ] -is not available they will attempt to screw anything around.
> ] -
>
> ... if a man were to do this, would he be any less mistreated, outcast or
> criticized than a homosexual?
Well, I certainly hope so.
> RatTrap
> rattrap@usa..net
--
Lars Ormberg
(I don't know where Mr. T lives. Stop phoning my home)
- I'm a genuine, certified, dixie fried, full of pride, 'til I die
pure bred redneck!
] -Coronal wrote:
] ->
] -> It's not a matter of using nature to justify human behavior. It's
] -> that so many quarter-wit jerks come in here claiming that
] -> homosexuality does not exist in nature and that it is unnatural. We
] -> then simply point out that this is not true. However it does seem to
] -> serve some purpose for the bonobos and other species in which
] -> homosexual behaviot has been observed. If it works for some human
] -> beings, then so be it.
] -
] -How many other natural (because some animals do it occasionally) acts
] -are you planning to justify with this logic?
] -
The original course wasn't to define homosexuality as natural, but to refute the
point that it is unnatural because animals don't do it... a ridiculous point to
begin with... you can't use animals as a baseline for human behaviour... if that
were the case, we'd have outlawed smiling and laughing a long time ago, because
man is the only being that laughs...
(And no... Hyena's don't laugh... they bark in a laughing fashion...)
> ] -Damn Queers...next thing you know they'll want to mingle with the good people!
>
> Damn bigots... next thing you know, they'll want to mingle with the humans...
At least the bigots are fully aware who deserves ogling during the
opening credits for "Baywatch"
> RatTrap
> rattrap@usa..net
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> "We share the same biology, regardless of ideology"
> - Sting - "Russians"
> --------------------------------------------------------
> The comments, ideas and beliefs expressed here are mine,
> not my employer's, not my politician's, not my mom's,
> and not some garbage dragged out of a book or magazine.
> Use your mind, examine your morals, and think freely.
> -------------------------------------------------------
--
Since cows spend 10 months of the year with only other cows, how
authoratative can that be? Even when the cows are in heat, a cow will
never mount another cow within about a week of that bull being around.
> Cheers
> --
> Dave Diduck
> 1123 Fort St
> Regina Sk S4T 5R9
> http://www.sasknet.com/~didue/
> The majority are not silent - politicians have selective hearing!
Hmmm...what a choice:
Shall I rent monkey gay porn?
Or Goldeneye?
Y'know, I've never been in a video store more than 5 minutes...
> --
> Ciao!
> John S. 8^{)>
> tedd...@netcom.com
> __
--
] -Ward Stewart wrote:
] ->
] -> kenfran <ken...@concentric.net> wrote:
] ->
] -> >It was the gay bashers who were trying to make the point that
] -> >homosexuality is unnatural because it is not found in animals. When it
] -> >was pointed out that it does occur with animals, suddenly the
] -> >gay-bashers want to say that proves nothing and act offended that the
] -> >subject was raised. Totally illogical, and indicative of the fact that
] -> >they have no justification for their position.
] ->
] -> On the contrary they have abundant justification for their
] -> positions --
] ->
] -> Blind Bible reading,
] -I'm not religious. Try again, Pocco
] -
] -> Hatefulness
] -Not always a bad thing
] -
] -> Prejudice
] -Not always a bad thing
] -
] -> A need to look down on someone
] -Only on those who are lower
] -
] -> Plain old fashioned fear of their own impulses
] -Intelligence to understand that impulses aren't always right
] - - "Just because we can do something, does not necessarily mean that
] -we must." -- Federation president, presiding over the Khitomer
] -conference
] -
] -> Deficiency of imagination
] -I can imagine a lot. Doesn't mean people should do it.
] -
] -> Lack of any useful notion of what love may be.
] -Useful notion of love? I suppose you forget the types of common
] -homosexual behaviours such as consuming of feces.
There's no use debating with Lars... especially when his standpoint is that
Hatefulness and predjudice are alright, when he uses a Star Trek quote as his
basis for argument, and that eating feces is a common practice among
homosexuals...
Lars... get out from under the reign of the boob tube (an apt description in
this case) and get educated. Your ignorance is shining brightly.
... you have a nice day too.
RatTrap