Gay Caveman? Ok, now i've heard it all!!

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Oh no, this can't be true. As certain users here have repeatedly stated: we would have all died out, if our ancestors had tolerated homosexuality!

When was your so-called "quote" said that way by anybody? As far as I remember, and put it myself , this ^ I have never said, nor anyone else.

People really have weak points only to make, if they need to put lies into other peoples' mouth in order to get these points across.

[DarkFish]

Originally Posted by Skybird

When was your so-called "quote" said that way by anybody? As far as I remember, and put it myself , this ^ I have never said, nor anyone else.

People really have weak points only to make, if they need to put lies into other peoples' mouth in order to get their own weak points across.

Originally Posted by Skybird

Seen that way we only survived until today and got that far only because the Apemen who were our forfathers had no capoability to discuss this concept, and could only say Oh, Uh, Ah and Eh. And procreate - most likely with partners of not the same sex, considering that the story of mankind did not end with them.

Well, it seems they did have the capability to discuss this concept..... And it seems they "tried to procreate" with same-sex partners as well as that is what gays do.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by DarkFish

Well, it seems they did have the capability to discuss this concept..... And it seems they "tried to procreate" with same-sex partners as well as that is what gays do.

Try to be a smartass again?

Quote the full context of that posting and note the irony I was using in frustration over there.

WhatI an others pointed out repeatedly, is two things. That a society cannot survive if it does not reproduce and makes babies, and thus a civilisation based on the principle of homosexuality being the norm will die out, and that this shall not mean not to tolerate homosexuals today. Will you please find these quotes too, you master-quoter? I explicitly defended homosexuals from getting discirminated. I just insist on them not beign seen as a bioliogical norm representing the design mainstream of evolution. And the sociual fucntion of families for a society making them more important, beyoind comparsion, for a society, then singles like me, or homosexual couples.

Now go on, twist and turn words again to bring over your "point". Its gettin g tiresome.



Tolerance for the small number of deviations in a biological norm, whether it be albionis of homosxual individuals,m is one thing. They way a population developes by biological terms of evolution'S design of reproduction, is somethign different. I am not dumb enough it seems to understand what is so difficult in this to understand it.