Heartless_mage (Apr 13, 2008)
Whether someone objects to it on religious grounds or not the facts still stand. It is not new and we can look at history to see what has happened to other societies that have done the same thing. Since I have two historians for brothers I get to learn about this stuff for free. Lucky me.some woman that was saying that all previous countries in history that had embraced homosexuality had come to a demise.
So remember the three signs I mentioned:
- Exclusive homosexual relationships.
- Blood sport to appease the common people.
- Societal indulgence in addictive substances.
... and try not to get upset when someone tells you something new without looking into it first.
Heartless_mage (Apr 13, 2008)
Exclusive homosexual societies? Have those ever existed?
I mean they can't even reproduce.
Uh... yeah... show me evidence of these exclusively homosexual societies... because apparently the gheys have not been told.
In order for a "gay civilization" to arise, you'd need the gays to reproduce long enough to develop culture, government, and defense systems. In reproducing at all, you've deemed them "bisexual" and therefore exempt from the example. Did they reproduce via budding? O_o; Or did six or seven queers just run off into the desert together, build a few hut, compose some poetry, poke the heteros with sticks and that's our "society"?
And the term "homosexual" (literally "same" "sex"), depending on its use, implies no exclusivity of homosexual behaviors. You're using it in it's modern tv/pulpit sense (ie. the sexual orientation "homosexual").
homosexuality - Definitions from Dictionary.com
I have used it correctly. My Japanese history book includes 58 references to "homosexuality" in it's appendix...
It is interesting though, in these modern times an exclusively lesbian society could theoretically exist right? Using in vitro fertilisation.
I wonder if it would work out... Many feminist organisations collapsed pretty fast. The power of nature and instincts is probably hard to repress.
Searched for awhile for defunct gay civilizations... this is about all I could find:
Very Bad News - The New York Review of Books
Oddly enough, none of the defunct civilizations mentioned were homosexual in nature...
"The dangers of catastrophe are growing. One reason is the rise of apocalyptic terrorism. Another... is the breakneck pace of scientific and technological advance.... The cost of dangerous technologies, such as those of nuclear and biological warfare, and the level of skill required to employ them are falling, which is placing more of the technologies within reach of small nations, terrorist gangs, and even individual psychopaths. Yet, great as it is, the challenge of managing the catastrophic risks is receiving less attention than is lavished on social issues of far less intrinsic significance, such as race relations, whether homosexual marriage should be permitted, the size of the federal deficit, drug addiction, and child pornography. Not that these are trivial issues. But they do not involve events of potential extinction or the modestly less cataclysmic variants of those events."
that would seem to imply that our danger of killing ourselves off due to social/moral issues is pretty minimal in comparison to us simply breeding/eating/consuming/bombing ourselves out of house and home.
Seeing as most of the defunt civilizations in that article died off from deforestation, land use, starvation, natural disaster and over-population: maybe exclusive homosexuals are doing us a favor in not reproducing?