If homosexuality was normal, it would be the end of the human race, how can it not be wrong.
2006-07-26 15:58:21 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
i do. Its totaly wong.how will they have children.naturaly its men and women not two men.
2006-07-26 16:04:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 7⤋
Morals change from person to person so the way u asked this question is on an opinion basis...But I do believe is is morally worng...I think anything that u must hide is wrong or why else would u hide and deny it....It is not normal and it is a sin....But homosexuals are still human...they are just practing a wrong lifestyle just as many americans do....Drugs, Pre-marital sex, Adultry, and murder all forms of sin and none looked as greater then the other through the eyes of the lord...
2006-07-26 17:28:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Population control. Honestly it is one of nature's way of population control. Imagine how many more people we would have in the world if there were not gay people. The human race can't even help all the people there are now. I believe I was born this way. And as far as not having kids...I can still pop in a woman if I wanted to. I just wouldn't have feelings for her. I can also have someone be a surrogate mother for my child. So, no it is not the end of the human race.
2006-07-26 19:00:09 · answer #3 · answered by yokaimayhem 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The end of the human race may be wrong as far as humans are concerned, but ask any other animal on this planet. Can you name one thing on Earth that would miss human beings? Or ask the Earth for that matter. Do you think the Earth enjoys being polluted? You are disparaging a class of people who by definition can't add more starving humans to this Earth. I think gays should get a substantial tax break. And no, I'm not gay.
2006-07-26 16:24:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's not the end of the human race. The fact that more and more people are being born into a world that can't support them is a tragady. To be honest, we'd probably benifit more from about 10-20 years of no one being born in so that the Earth can handle the growing poulation. That is if you want to get right down to the real problem today, and not gay ******* marriage or anything like that.
2006-07-26 16:04:40 · answer #5 · answered by Danny H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually this is the same things that where said about interracial relationships...so far things are working out pretty good. And just because homosexuality is normal does not mean that everyone has to be homosexual. The human race is not going to end because of homosexuality...chill. (oh and I totally support interracial relationships, I am black, mexican, and white.)
2006-07-26 16:14:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Normal".. that has always been a very interesting term, and I have never heard two people define it the same. The statement you are making.. as flawed as it is.. hints that for homosexuality to be "normal" it would have to be something everyone was. I don't know if you woke up under a rock this morning, but not any two people are alike.. str8, gay.. or whatever. Would you truly like for everyone to be exactly the same?.. I think not. You are a very narrow minded individual.
2006-07-26 16:28:18 · answer #7 · answered by blah 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So..you're saying that the only reason that humans are on earth is to procreate? If that's the case...how about people who choose not to have children...or people who for a medical reason cannot conceive? Are you implying that these people are also abnormal..or immoral?
Hmm.....
And let's explore your "theory" further. If the only people who are "morally" right and deserve to be on the planet are ones who can procreate. What do you think we should do with people once they get older and can no longer have children...post menopausal women? There is NOTHING "wrong" with being gay. What if it were turned around and a decree went out that all ignorant people would be eliminated. Hmm..where do you think that would put you?
2006-07-26 16:20:01 · answer #8 · answered by GoldnHart 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Hate the sin, no longer the sinner." extremely so. as far as forgiveness for the sin is in contact, that ought to might want to come from God. The habit in question is morally incorrect because it frustrates the purpose of a human school that, in accordance with organic reasoning and commentary isn't meant purely to arise with the money for excitement to the activities in contact. The motive is to better the race, to procreate. This can't take position in those cases and so that is ultimately an attack on the way ahead for the society. We get a glimpse of this contained in the crises that are happening a range of of international places because of the shortcoming of inhabitants. it is a global situation if similar-sex unions were dominant.
2016-10-15 06:15:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that forcing everyone to breed is morally wrong. I have no problem with some people electing not to breed and I don't think that a small numerical minority not breeding will cause our extinction. After all there are almost 7 billion of us running around and most are breeding.
2006-07-26 16:04:04 · answer #10 · answered by dani_kin 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
not me.
<
the same could be said of abstinence
2006-07-26 16:09:40 · answer #11 · answered by answer faerie, V.T., A. M. 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋