Not born that way

[No wides]

If it was so normal the human population would have ceased a long time ago.

Why, because the 90% of the population that is straight wouldn't be enough to keep things going?

By your standard Down Syndrome is not "normal". Rarity doesn't make something unnatural or something to be marginalized.

That's as low as you have went and you have went low, why don't you stick to the debate and not bring in people with learning disabilities.

Are you missing the point deliberately?

I think you are, sad you have to bring in people with learning disabilities to back up your chic liberal views.

So I'm going to have to spell it out slowly, again, for you.

1. You're attacking homosexuality as not "normal" on the basis that it would have led to the extinction of humans if it wasn't.
2. I raised the obvious point that 90-odd% of humans are straight, so how exactly could homosexuality cause human extinction (you ignored this question).
3. I brought up Down Syndrome, another set of traits that naturally affects a minority of people and which could affect someone's ability to procreate, just like homosexuality. I could have used other examples, the point would be the same.
4. And the point, already stated, is that rarity of a trait i.e. it not being "normal", is NOT a reason for suppression or marginalization. But, again, you ignore the actual point (wonder why?).

To summarize: It wasn't a comment at all on Down Syndrome. It was a comment on your, once again, flawed logic.

So why use it, you made the choice to use people with learning disabilities to backup some logic you have about homosexuality.  It is disgusting, but you don't care as you need to be seen to be liberal as for another set of traits in relation to people with learning disabilities, unreal!

All right, I'm disgusting!

Now address the point!

The point has been well made throughout this thread, you are making it up as you go along to be some chic liberal, you have proved you have nothing but bullshit, as I said earlier I'll light a candle for your kids over the holiday period - God help them!

[J70]

For the record people with learning disabilities can have children - but don't let facts get in the way of your bullshit.

I didn't say they couldn't.

You implied it.

"3. I brought up Down Syndrome, another set of traits that naturally affects a minority of people and which could affect someone's ability to procreate, just like homosexuality."

"Could affect" doesn't mean "can't".

[J70]

If it was so normal the human population would have ceased a long time ago.

Why, because the 90% of the population that is straight wouldn't be enough to keep things going?

By your standard Down Syndrome is not "normal". Rarity doesn't make something unnatural or something to be marginalized.

That's as low as you have went and you have went low, why don't you stick to the debate and not bring in people with learning disabilities.

Are you missing the point deliberately?

I think you are, sad you have to bring in people with learning disabilities to back up your chic liberal views.

So I'm going to have to spell it out slowly, again, for you.

1. You're attacking homosexuality as not "normal" on the basis that it would have led to the extinction of humans if it wasn't.
2. I raised the obvious point that 90-odd% of humans are straight, so how exactly could homosexuality cause human extinction (you ignored this question).
3. I brought up Down Syndrome, another set of traits that naturally affects a minority of people and which could affect someone's ability to procreate, just like homosexuality. I could have used other examples, the point would be the same.
4. And the point, already stated, is that rarity of a trait i.e. it not being "normal", is NOT a reason for suppression or marginalization. But, again, you ignore the actual point (wonder why?).

To summarize: It wasn't a comment at all on Down Syndrome. It was a comment on your, once again, flawed logic.

So why use it, you made the choice to use people with learning disabilities to backup some logic you have about homosexuality.  It is disgusting, but you don't care as you need to be seen to be liberal as for another set of traits in relation to people with learning disabilities, unreal!

All right, I'm disgusting!

Now address the point!

The point has been well made throughout this thread, you are making it up as you go along to be some chic liberal, you have proved you have nothing but bullshit, as I said earlier I'll light a candle for your kids over the holiday period - God help them!

Yes, several people have shown your "point" about "normality" to be bullshit.

You, on the other hand, have NOT backed up that it isn't bullshit.

This is your opportunity to do so. Shouldn't be hard if it is so obvious.

[Applesisapples]

If it was so normal the human population would have ceased a long time ago.

Why, because the 90% of the population that is straight wouldn't be enough to keep things going?

By your standard Down Syndrome is not "normal". Rarity doesn't make something unnatural or something to be marginalized.

That's as low as you have went and you have went low, why don't you stick to the debate and not bring in people with learning disabilities.

Are you missing the point deliberately?

I think you are, sad you have to bring in people with learning disabilities to back up your chic liberal views.

So I'm going to have to spell it out slowly, again, for you.

1. You're attacking homosexuality as not "normal" on the basis that it would have led to the extinction of humans if it wasn't.
2. I raised the obvious point that 90-odd% of humans are straight, so how exactly could homosexuality cause human extinction (you ignored this question).
3. I brought up Down Syndrome, another set of traits that naturally affects a minority of people and which could affect someone's ability to procreate, just like homosexuality. I could have used other examples, the point would be the same.
4. And the point, already stated, is that rarity of a trait i.e. it not being "normal", is NOT a reason for suppression or marginalization. But, again, you ignore the actual point (wonder why?).

To summarize: It wasn't a comment at all on Down Syndrome. It was a comment on your, once again, flawed logic.

So why use it, you made the choice to use people with learning disabilities to backup some logic you have about homosexuality.  It is disgusting, but you don't care as you need to be seen to be liberal as for another set of traits in relation to people with learning disabilities, unreal!

All right, I'm disgusting!

Now address the point!

The point has been well made throughout this thread, you are making it up as you go along to be some chic liberal, you have proved you have nothing but bullshit, as I said earlier I'll light a candle for your kids over the holiday period - God help them!

I think it's you who needs the candle mate.

[thebigfella]

If it was so normal the human population would have ceased a long time ago.

Why, because the 90% of the population that is straight wouldn't be enough to keep things going?

By your standard Down Syndrome is not "normal". Rarity doesn't make something unnatural or something to be marginalized.

That's as low as you have went and you have went low, why don't you stick to the debate and not bring in people with learning disabilities.

Are you missing the point deliberately?

I think you are, sad you have to bring in people with learning disabilities to back up your chic liberal views.

So I'm going to have to spell it out slowly, again, for you.

1. You're attacking homosexuality as not "normal" on the basis that it would have led to the extinction of humans if it wasn't.
2. I raised the obvious point that 90-odd% of humans are straight, so how exactly could homosexuality cause human extinction (you ignored this question).
3. I brought up Down Syndrome, another set of traits that naturally affects a minority of people and which could affect someone's ability to procreate, just like homosexuality. I could have used other examples, the point would be the same.
4. And the point, already stated, is that rarity of a trait i.e. it not being "normal", is NOT a reason for suppression or marginalization. But, again, you ignore the actual point (wonder why?).

To summarize: It wasn't a comment at all on Down Syndrome. It was a comment on your, once again, flawed logic.

So why use it, you made the choice to use people with learning disabilities to backup some logic you have about homosexuality.  It is disgusting, but you don't care as you need to be seen to be liberal as for another set of traits in relation to people with learning disabilities, unreal!

All right, I'm disgusting!

Now address the point!

The point has been well made throughout this thread, you are making it up as you go along to be some chic liberal, you have proved you have nothing but bullshit, as I said earlier I'll light a candle for your kids over the holiday period - God help them!

I think it's you who needs the candle mate.

Seeing he's so obsessed, he'd probably dildo the ass of himself with it.

[Tony Baloney]

[gallsman]

Bombarded with homosexuality? Christ almighty, you appear to think there's some sort of gay conspiracy that is in some way out to "get" your kids. Daft.

f**k sake Billy, since 1998, we've been getting bombarded with Fenians everywhere. Them b**tards have started wearing GAA taps down round Queens and Jordanstown. I heard Jackie Fullerton was actually at a match this one time. They're even talking about letting some of them appear on the telly ffs! Fenians f**king everywhere, my kids can't get go to school without seeing a Fenian!

[No wides]

If it was so normal the human population would have ceased a long time ago.

Why, because the 90% of the population that is straight wouldn't be enough to keep things going?

By your standard Down Syndrome is not "normal". Rarity doesn't make something unnatural or something to be marginalized.

That's as low as you have went and you have went low, why don't you stick to the debate and not bring in people with learning disabilities.

Are you missing the point deliberately?

I think you are, sad you have to bring in people with learning disabilities to back up your chic liberal views.

So I'm going to have to spell it out slowly, again, for you.

1. You're attacking homosexuality as not "normal" on the basis that it would have led to the extinction of humans if it wasn't.
2. I raised the obvious point that 90-odd% of humans are straight, so how exactly could homosexuality cause human extinction (you ignored this question).
3. I brought up Down Syndrome, another set of traits that naturally affects a minority of people and which could affect someone's ability to procreate, just like homosexuality. I could have used other examples, the point would be the same.
4. And the point, already stated, is that rarity of a trait i.e. it not being "normal", is NOT a reason for suppression or marginalization. But, again, you ignore the actual point (wonder why?).

To summarize: It wasn't a comment at all on Down Syndrome. It was a comment on your, once again, flawed logic.

So why use it, you made the choice to use people with learning disabilities to backup some logic you have about homosexuality.  It is disgusting, but you don't care as you need to be seen to be liberal as for another set of traits in relation to people with learning disabilities, unreal!

All right, I'm disgusting!

Now address the point!

The point has been well made throughout this thread, you are making it up as you go along to be some chic liberal, you have proved you have nothing but bullshit, as I said earlier I'll light a candle for your kids over the holiday period - God help them!

I think it's you who needs the candle mate.

Seeing he's so obsessed, he'd probably dildo the ass of himself with it.

Going for world domination and hating children wtf can you bring to this? Unless gays polish your car better.

[No wides]

For the record people with learning disabilities can have children - but don't let facts get in the way of your bullshit.

I didn't say they couldn't.

You implied it.

"3. I brought up Down Syndrome, another set of traits that naturally affects a minority of people and which could affect someone's ability to procreate, just like homosexuality."

"Could affect" doesn't mean "can't".

So why did you bring up people with learning disabilities?

[No wides]

Gay cousins aside be interesting to know who arguring here is gay or has a gay immediate family member - no pun intended. Expect silence. Even hetros who like sausage or pie on the side. Cop yourselves on the lot of you.

[foxcommander]

As for gays and gingers - have gingers been the subject of repression? There didn't used to be many racial and ethnic minorities on tv (some would argue they're still not fully represented). Entertainment mirrors society. It was not a coincidence that Captain Kirk kissed Uhura in Star Trek in the late 60s but it had to be cut from the broadcast in the southern states. As society grows more accepting of homosexuality (or trangenderism - look at the Amazon series, which is pretty decent), tv and movies will reflect that.

Just need to correct you.
Society is being forced to accept these as normal otherwise risk being labelled by the PC crowd.
TV/social media pushes the agenda. Celebrities endorse it.

question is, given the choice would people want to engage with differing groups.

[Eamonnca1]

For the record people with learning disabilities can have children - but don't let facts get in the way of your bullshit.

So can same-sex couples.

[HiMucker]

Just to add a modicum of balance.  Although I think nowides is talking absolute dung, we did have a conversation down the pub ( I know... ) that there was a disproportionate number of gays on tv shows.  Now I have no facts and figures to back this up, but i would be amazed if this was not the case.  An argument about the pros or cons of this is another diacussion, one that I dont really give a monkies about.

[thebigfella]

Going for world domination and hating children wtf can you bring to this? Unless gays polish your car better.

Your obsessed with how they polish each other's knobs. This voyeurism could be your gateway drug to you taking the next step physically.

[gallsman]

Now I have no facts and figures to back this up, but i would be amazed if this was not the case.

As Neil Fox said on BrassEye about paedos having more DNA in common with crabs then humans, "that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it's scientific fact."