Sodomy is a definitive act of biohazardy that causes damage, disease, and harm to the general health of the public in every instance it is committed. Modern doctors don't even deny thisThe act of penetrating the thin, delicate, single layer, non-elastic mucous membrane of the anus causes the fragile area have abrasions and tears inside the rectal wall every time. Having tears in your feces orifice is a fast track for infection and disease by its very nature of causing wounds where there otherwise wouldn't beWe know from Biology that the colon is evolutionarily adapted for elimination of waste, not for friction and impact brought on through sodomy. The act itself is tantamount self-poisoningThen on the other end of the spectrum is male-male sodomy specifically that doubles this biological threat. As stated before the "receiver" can is exposing their blood vessel dense injured rectal walls to feces and bacteria, but a male putting his phallus into the feces orifice is likewise commiting biohazardry on himself.The penis is one of the most hyperpermeable surfaces on the body, and to get bacteria and disease easily into the bloodstream through contact. By purposely shoving this permeable membrane into a hole that is infinitely contaminated with feces, the "giver" is also bringing on unnecessary disease onto themselves>but they can wear condoms85% of Gay men admit to NEVER using a condom 100% of the time, and even a single act of sodomy is still an act of the highest biohazardry.
Beyond that there is the inevitability of incontinence and anal prolapse from consistent sodomy that can't be reasoned away as the biological orifice just isn't made for impact and friction.Humans would never condone eating shit so why would we condone Sodomy in any case?In a free society, humans are free to do whatever they want consentingly as long as it doesn't harm others. But doesn't actively turning yourself into a biohazard warrant being condemned for the health of the general community?Humans have a multitude of ways of expression intimacy, but Sodomy is not one of them. It is biohazardy of the highest order.
What if, instead of appealing to the rational mind as if you're still stuck in the enlightenment paradigm, you just appeal to something older?Sodomy is gross and a sin. It's that easy. The same reason you're appealing to is also attached to liberalism which in the same breath justifies the homosexual lifestyles by confering rights to them.
>>539887171yesive promoted this viewpoint beforefaggots can't use the MUH SCIENCE argument against this. this IS the scientific argument.
>>539887171
Gays are disgusting pieces of shit who subvert and cause wars and I support the death penalty for them.But a man should legally be able to fuck a woman in the ass without that being considered sodomy.The man-man love is the problem here.
>>539887590we have a sodomy pandemic spreading disease all across the worldits time to quarantine the gays>yu vill put on the straight jacket
Sour grapes chud incels cant fuck hot chicks asses so they want the government to regulate it
>>539887644>>539887829gays have tried and failed to popularise anal sex among straights.only bisexuals do it.
>>539887358Arbitrary designation of sin without a logical, rational meaning and purpose is just subjective moralism based in whatever regional culture and society you are basing that premise on. You need solid, empirical, scientific basis to make your justifications.If your mind is so tethered your christian religion, there isn't much I can say other than to appeal to the Catholic Thomist purview that lends deference to science. That the book of nature (learning "God's" world through science would reveal God's truths). This is a compatible view in the very simple example of something like Incest. It was considered an abomination without reason in your book of morals, but through science we understood that overlapping alleles and genetic redundancies would produce poor genetic health outcomes that in the ancient world would have been seen as "cursed." Today we can see the same thing by understanding why the arbitrary prohibition on specifically the act of sodomy (male laying with a man like a women, i.e. penetration) is considered abominable. Because the act itself is biohazardry that puts feces and bacteria into the bloodstreams of both participants and damages the health of the general public at large with such disease proliferation. Your ancients likely saw a similar trend that sodomy produced no offspring and caused disease, hence it was seen as "cursed" and called for its prohibition. But at the end of the day, Science is the ultimate way to know objective truth, and we know sodomy, in all cases, not just male-male, but female-male as well, is biohazardry.>>539887590Yes, I'm obsessed with biohazardry and the draining of our precious limited antibiotics to accommodate sodomites causing reckless biohazardry. Humans have a multitude of ways of expression intimacy, but Sodomy is not one of them. It is biohazardy.>>539887829It is a threat to public health and any participants who do it objectively, you can't argue against the fact otherwise.
>>539887171STOP MAKING HOMOPHOBIC THREADS USING THE TF2 MEDIC. HERBERT HUMBOLDT IS A GAY ICON YOU FUCKING CHUS.
>>539888261you will get a ball gag with your strait jacket
>>539887171obviously it should be brought back, but faggots here and some straight guys that like to sodomize women will cry about it
>>539887945true its probably bisexual but i don't even consider that a "sexuality" its just hypersexualized people
>>539888104I think you're putting the cart before the horse.You forget that the masses don't think the same way. You have to use baby talk. Remember, the more people in a crowd, the lower the IQ by trading for EQ. This is built into humans.The bible and the laws of moses that Jesus fulfilled existed for a reason that SCIENCE ultimately provides proof for and culminates in a way of life for humanity. All those laws against immorality, sodomy, adultery, fornication, they all had a reason and scientific backing, just that nobody asked God why.
>>539888531There is nothing to cry about. Humans have a multitude of ways of expressing physical intimacy, but Sodomy is not one of them. It is biohazardy.Explaining to anyone the logistics of what penetrating the fecal orifice with your hyperpermeable phallus does to get feces and bacteria directly into your bloodstream is valid enough to make anyone understand its need for condemnation as an activity promoted currently by society as healthy when it is a genuine health detriment.
>>539888629i think its a sexuality.im straight and never had an attraction to men or anal sex ever, even during times when I was heavily porn addicted.
>>539888531Some anon mentioned that sodomy and being gay was linked to parasites, and there were cases where ivermectin, yes the same drug that some anons pushed during the plandemic, cured some cases of being gay. I'm inclined to lean towards that, since toxoplasmosis from cats exist, why can't other parasites that alter human behaviour exist.
>>539888816It's a parasite.>>539888825Therre are also cases where people have taken turpentine and lost their "gayness".
>>539888104Science is not going to get you to an objective truth ever, it's going to get you a simulation of it that is predictively valid relative to the quality of the model.Do you think reality actually operates on human-made numbers and mathematics or do you at least acknowledge that these are human constructs that give us very good approximations of phenomena provided the model is good?The lack of dogmatic religiosity and morals has lead to an environment where faggots on line start asking for a peer-reviewed study go demonstrate what is facially long before humans relied on "reason" to know.Science and credentialism are just components of the progressive view of history. Humanity isn't progressing, we're regressing. Civilizations ebn and flow, knowledge is attained and then lost, and we aren't progressing towards perfection.
>>539887171>we need laws Nah. Laws never stopped the actual sodomy in the first place. Who cares? We just don’t need big gay meme trendy cultural shit that being a flaming fairy is cool or to be desired. I don’t care if two dudes want to fuck, I never have. Just keep it in the bedroom
>>539888929It doesn't have to just be parasites, it can also be the composition of your gut bacteria. A lot of the things we do is subconsciously influenced by the bacterial families living on our bodies.
>>539887171OP doesn't want you to do shit!
>>539887171Anon. If we just fuck enough butts, we will evolve to have anuses made for fucking. We might even evolve to the point where we can get a lady pregnant in the butt. Ever thought of that? > t. Read first two paragraphsNigger
>>539889077>Science is not going to get you to an objective truth ever, it's going to get you a simulation of it that is predictively valid relative to the quality of the model.checkedalso, science is ultimately a method, a tool, a way of thinkingit's not the cure-all liberals think it is
>>539887171just make your femboy powerwash his butthole before you do it and everything's finehowever that rarely happens because gays are retarded
Is this a common spam thread? Saw this exact topic with the same medic gimmick a few days ago
>>539888825I've never heard of anything of empirical rigor to validate such a claim. This sounds like bitchute confirmation bias.>>539889077Science is not objective truth, it is endlessly striving through empirical analysis and review to edge ever closer to the truth, but it will never truly be known by human minds. Have there been compromised actions in scientific fields that the flip in the 2010s from accomadating gender dysphoria to enabling it purely based on social sympathy rather than what the data showed about enabling it not improving health outcomes? Sure. Science is of course a tool of humans and humans are flawed and can be manipulated by interests, rewards, or social pressure. What does not hold up is just saying an arbitrary religion is defacto correct if the contention doesn't align with the scientific rigor. And sodomy, while arbitrarily prohibited in most cultures was brought on by religious morality (which was likely just reactionary observational assessments of seeing that sodomy produced no children and caused disease) without having the empirical data we have now to justify its condemnation.
>>539889420We can at least use it as a point of critique for scientism.
>>539889322It must be said that when it comes to "anal sex" women will make sure it's clean. It seems like faggots don't care, and that's probably the parasitic influence, parasites spread through... fecal matter...
>>539889465>I've never heard of anything of empirical rigor to validate such a claimSimple, because no one has enough funding or interest to study parasites in the human body. I'm inferring the behaviour of one known parasite that does alter and affect human behaviour, toxoplasmosis from cats that become the phenomenon everyone knows: cat ladies. Toxoplasmosis is the most visible parasite that proves it can alter human behaviour.You really should look up parasites in nature such as what happens to wasps and crabs.
>>539888929I wonder how these people feel and whats their opinions on fags now they’re not fags anymore. Do they feel disgust when their memory of intimacy with another man pops up suddenly in their brain? Must be a torture.
>>539889465Jonathan Haidt, a liberal, has a good book called The Righteous Mind. One of the main thrusts in it is that moral foundations are born of an initial feeling or emotion and then rationalized afterwards.In other words you will not reach people using empirical evidence. The arguments are not convincing and you may as well be using Shapiro-tier rhetorical devices by citing a bunch of statistics at people. You need to tap into something deeper in order to manipulate people like Bernays or Lippmann suggest.I advocate against scientism not because I think it's harmful, but rather because it's not going to be as useful as good old fashioned propagnda and religiousity.
>>539887171Aren't there more important things to focus on first rather than anal sex? Also, you can clean yourself so that it's clean enough to drink out of. Lube also exists to almost remove friction entirely.
>>539889889>I advocate against scientism not because I think it's harmful, but rather because it's not going to be as useful as good old fashioned propagnda and religiousity.Holy shit, someone who understands! Yes, humans are first and foremost emotional creatures. Reasoning comes second, usually after a good beating.
>>539887171>no more blowjobshey buddy, how about you blow your shit smoov off instead? :D
>>539890000You know what's funny, no matter where you are on the internet some liberal atheist will pipe up and say >so you admit religion is designed to control people lolas if the entire conversation isn't about how to control behavior of the masses and that the argument wasn't settled decades ago. Religion as an evolutionary strategy is so effective there's basically no civilizations without it.
>>539889322Even under perfect conditions it is still biohazardry to the penetrated participant. You can say>But the penetrator wore a condom! So no infection in their blood stream!>The phallus was lubricated to minimize rupturing of the anus or colon!>The penetrated relaxed their anus muscles preemptively to make the act less abrasive!>The Penetrated did a water enema so there was no feces during the act!Even if you did all of this that would make up only 0.1% of sodomy acts following this level of safety, it wouldn't remove the fact that the violent impact and friction caused by the act still causes microabrasions in the colon and anus that is not meant for that. Biologically the structure of the one being penetrated is having a single layered, inelastic, thin, delicate, and non-foldable membrane of the anus and colon abrased and exposed to the feces and bacteria via the bloodstream as even after an enema, those exposed hyperpermeable membranes will inevitably get more feces as the waste elimination pipeline doesn't stop long enough for the wounds to heal. Humans defecate at least once a day on average while the wounds would need 4-5 days to reseal.>>539889420It is a matter of making this a point of public health that isn't being address at all in politics right now.>>539889721be that as it may, its not a valid contention here. Purposeful biohazardry caused by getting feces and bacteria into the bloodstream of participants is sufficient enough to justify sodomy's condemnation scientifically.>>539889889rooting the argument in science makes it undeniable from all viewpoints. You can't give any contention that invalidates the biohazardry that sodomy causes. >>539889953It is the cause of over 50% of our STDs and 80% of all HIV cases. It is purposeful biohazardry that wastes our precious and limited supply of antibiotics constantly treating those who participate in this act and draws us evercloser to antibiotic-resistant strains needlessly.
>>539890047I am talking about the act of sodomy in its medical definition, the penetration of the anus and colon by a phallus or dildo. This act is biohazardry by putting feces and bacteria into the bloodstream of 1 if not 2 people if the sex does not involve a condom (85% of sodomy is reported to never use condoms in gay and straight couples)Humans have a multitude of ways of expression intimacy, but Sodomy is not one of them. Oral and manual stimulation of the genitals is not biohazardry like sodomy is.
>>539890341Rooting an argument in Science™ is only as useful as the buy-in from the person you're trying to convince.In a sense you've tried to setup scientific studies as above religion, but if you don't convince the listener then you can correct, but ignored. Equally it's unwise to root your morality in science due to the evolving and changing nature of it. As an example: If tomorrow several studies come out that suggesting that AI-generated CSAM deters pedophiles from offending or reoffending, will you then start advocating for its proliferation in society?I wouldn't, but my moral foundations aren't based on science.
ITT repressed volcels who have never had the pleasure of biting a woman as you fill her asshole with lawyers and priests, before discarding her like the cum sleeve she is
>>539887171ER nurses should be able to refuse treatment to people who show up with live animals and such shoved all the way up into their small intestines, its a shame most people who sign up for the job are willing to do it just to have something to complain about
>>539887171>I should have a right to decide what someone else does with their propertyRejected by default.
>>539891483Gayyyy
>>539891483Yep it functions from the pretense that there is no private property, we got the most extreme part of communism and none of the worker rights
>>539891483>he thinks we deal in rights like some liberallollmao
>>539890341HIV has never been an issue with me because I act with utmost caution and I don't have sex with everyone. Still do it more than straight people do but I have never taken a risk like that in my life before and never will. It's also impossible to prove or know if someone has or is having anal sex. I think this argument is kind of pointless if your goal is to change the status quo -- not that I want that -- but what the other Anon said about propaganda and appealing to emotion would be much more effective. You see what's happening with trans people right now I'm sure. People have been convinced that a fraction of a fraction of the population is disproportionately responsible for societal issues. They have created this ambiguity that exists as a focal point where the observer can project and amplify things onto it. Simply put people will and do believe what they want to believe, and by encouraging it and creating an environment for these things to prosper the charismatic individuals in these belief groups will influence others, this along with peer pressure, fear, etc. Also we are now in an era where automated mass propaganda can occur with AI which can literally measure responses, do A B testing, etc, all on its own and quantify how well propaganda is doing by giving positive and negative weights to words and measuring them in response to automated replies and measuring their relevant occurrence over time, etc. We are entering an era where things like this, attempts like this, etc, no longer truly matter. I don't know if you take this seriously or if it's just a fun or engaging activity for you to try your debate skills but I recommended focusing on your loved ones and your success in life. Effective alteration of the status quo requires status oneself.
feed crossniggers to lions again
>>539891556It's either feudalist or commie speak to control other people's property. I expect nothing different from the US mutant population because they're dumber than a glass of water. I do expect better from everyone else.
>>539891764The small populations at the fringes of society are symptoms, not causes.A stronger moral and religious foundation as well as the end of decadence would quickly ensure conformity with the rest of society due to its necessity for survival in such an environment. The enlightenment and liberalism that western societies adopted in favor of religion is mostly responsible for these groups' existences.We're in a civilizational fall and closing in on winter, times will eventually be bad enough that liberalism can't be sustained through decadence any more.I'm also unconvinced the tech oligarchy will complete or be able to sustain their panopticon once times become tough.
>>539890696You seem to have a notion that I am projecting morality. The notions that I am putting forward are those of bioethics based on the general safety of the public. No different than what we do as a society for dangerous things like HIV. Two consenting adults infecting each other with HIV is still considered a crime because it is spreading a dangerous disease regardless of the volition of the parties involved. This level of biohazardry is the same level with sodomy. For the good of the public and for those who would participate in this action the act needs to be condemned at a minimum, and prohibited if legally possible. Any notion of trying to make this conjecture based on religious social or morality that can be subjective culture to culture is moot. You can say incest is bad because the Torah says it because the gospel says it or because the Quran says it, but the biological reality of creating genetic deficiencies in offspring is the known reason why we prohibit and condemn incest. Likewise we have the scientific rigor and empirical data to concisely and definitively convey that sodomy is a biohazard. Humans have a multitude of ways to express physical intimacy but sodomy is not one of them. It is biohazardry.>>539891483It is illegal to create bio weapons in your own household. It is illegal for consenting two people to affect one another with HIV. It should likewise be illegal for people to purposely infect one another with feces and bacteria causing them to run through our precious and limited antibiotics inevitably proliferating potentially resistant strains.The bioethics of a Prohibition of sodomy is scientifically sound. Humans have a multitude of ways to express physical intimacy, but rupturing the fecal orifice cavity with a hyper permeable phallus and getting two people to have feces and bacteria in their bloodstream directly is not one of them. It is biohazardry.
By this logic we need to stop oral sex too, because the mouth wasn't made to be fucked.
>>539894232except the anus was not meant to be entered at all.
>>539890341You sure think a lot about cocks in men's assholes.
>>539894414So should we ban suppositories?
>>539894232Mouths are also arguably just as dirty as assholes - maybe even moreso in some ways
>>539894232Vaginas also contain fecal matter, and urine, neither of which are sterile. That was the other point I was going to make.
>>539894529Funny enough the mouth actually has more bacteria than the anus.
>>539894973It's also more prone to bleeding than the ants or the vagina. Lol
>>539894595That’s just your women, rajesh
This closeted faggot with this thread again.you sure seem to spend a lot of time and effort on buttsex. Leave others alone with your homoerotic psyco dribble. My ass my choice. You need help or maybe just a boyfriend. Anyhoo piss off. My a
>>539894232I'm not making a naturalistic argument nor a prescriptive functionalist argument on the anatomy. I act sodomy itself causes biohazardry by getting feces and bacteria directly into the bloodstream through hyperpermeable membranes and micro wounds.>>539894529The mouth is meant to take in materials and has mechanisms to be able to handle foreign bacteria and sins anything ingested directly into an acidic base that attempts to break down potential things that would damage the body otherwise. However there is no equivalency of putting any food dirt or sex related liquids (vaginal or phallus in origin) to getting the bacteria and feces directly into the bloodstream via the hyperpermeable phallus glans and the abrasions caused by the act of sodomy. Humans of any proclivity do not need to worry about purposeful biohazardry from oral sex, regardless of how violent it is because there is no feces or dangerous bacteria in the equation. Just sex organ liquids and potentially leftover food and bacteria that are negligible by comparison.
>>539894595You're making the very contention of why bioethics are thing. In societies with poor hygiene the health outcomes are obvious. Unprotected vaginas are likely to have persistent urine and exposure to feces over the lifespan of a human doing it there natural acts without cleaning or wiping their asses. But we as a society know what is hygienic and helps to better our public health and personal health. And the act of cleaning our body parts from the waist that we produce is itself the bioethics that we practice today. There is no law telling you to wipe your ass but you know that you must as an imperative to keep from having feces and bacteria on you at all times and potentially spreading disease. Humans innately even have repulsion from the smell and sight of feces because of our biological imperative to keep away from what we innately know is toxic to us. Are pheromonate repulsion is not coincidental it is survivalistic to keep us from having even poor health outcomes. To that end sodomy is biohazardry as it is purposeful exposure of feces and bacteria to the bloodstream and must be condemned in all cases and prohibited if legally possible.
>>539889465>>539896178I’ve not seen any truly convincing evidence that sodomy and homosexual sex increases infection, or even all-cause mortality, sufficient for the gene to not be advantageous. Homosexuality is known to be fairly genetic and heritable, in the case of homosexuals with gender incongruence in childhood, we get a 1x10-7 p-value of association with genes of the glutamate transporter family. There are other genes also identified as being associated with homosexuality, involved in mate selection and olfaction in mammals.
>>539887171>you must get the vax!>you must shut down your business!>but go ahead and mix shit and blood in your rectal cauldron
>>539896227Even granting your premise as the sake of argument, feces aversion in males is not as useful evolutionarily speaking, given modern anatomy and immune surveillance, compared to female fecundity.
>>539888531Sodomy with women is not good either but it's not as bad as sodomy with men. Prostaglandin E2 in semen weakens the immune systems of males (not females) when it is introduced to the anus.
>>539896227There is a global collapse in human fertility, both male and female, and it’s been happening for a very long time, on evolutionary scales. Evolution likely prioritized spreading these polymorphic glutamate transporter genes because when expressed in women, they increase fertility and babies born (see fecundity effect). The evolutionary benefit of this trait in the female line overweighs the evolutionary costs suffers in the male line.
>>539898686The trait could be lethal in males, as in the gene when expressed coupe abort development, and evolution would still consider “homosexuality” advantageous at a certain equilibrium.
>>539898708Please outlaw sodomy, my wife cums like a freight train when I pump her tight asshole and I think making it actually illegal would probably make her love it even more
>>539892130Yeah, I'm aware of these things. I try telling this to other gay people and I get treated like Hitler half the time. Also, not so sure about the surveillance state bit. I think within 30 years the majority of the population will be regulated to a few living areas that are heavily monitored. Cars will be illegal to drive on their own. Everything will be watched. The most successful careers you can get are with dealing with AI somehow, or being an entertainer or a whore. The hierarchical systems in place will become even more extreme. We will have hard times and the surveillance state. I don't think anyone has it in them anymore to resist in America. Everyone is placated by luxury, toxic food, microplastics, and entertainment. Nobody even lives in reality anymore. Everyone exists with doubt in them and everyone ultimately only cares about their own comfort. As long as the smallest of carrots is dangled people will chase that even if everyone else around them was getting genocided.
>>539896227The issue is that you are trying to make a subjunctive claim about nature contrary to nature’s own indicative statements. It’s insane imo to try constructing a naturalistic argument against the very ontology of a naturalistic phenomenon, much less an evolutionarily advantageous trait.
Here's 2 ya
>>539898110If you don't understand the implication of feces and gut bacteria getting into the bloodstream, I don't believe you have a sound understanding if even basic biology. Genuinely contemplate someone coming up to you with a syringe and saying they would like to inject you with feces and gut bacteria would you present your arm?Gay men are the number one users of antibiotics in the developed world and also have sufficiently lower lifespans. This is explicitly because they are the primary participants of the act of sodomy. Frequent persistent exposure of feces and gut bacteria into their bloodstreams via their micro abrasions and their permeable membranes on their Phallus inevitably lead them to have worse hygiene internally and inevitably have disease proliferation about them. This is holy avoidable if the activities that they did for the expression of physical intimacy did not involve the fecal orifice and permeable membranes. The overrepresentation of gay men in STDs and HIV infections also correlate with them being the proponents of the act of sodomy. 1% of the population making up 45% of all STDs and 80% of all HIV cases is quite pronounced but makes sense when you consider their primary mode of physical intimacy is sodomy. They are constantly exposing their bloodstreams to feces and bacteria. The vector is clear. >>539899405You can make any kind of contention you want vaguely about how my notion is insane or incorrect but you have yet to disprove the fact that persistent exposure of feces and gut bacteria to the bloodstream is not biohazardry, tantamount to purposeful infection. Actually argue with my contentions.
>>539899537Thanks
>>539898182Fauci priorities
Straight people do butt stuff all the time and plenty of faggots abstain, anon. Your premise is sound, but your detractions are retarded. Try again, but harder next time.
>>539887171MMMMMMMMMM BIG GOVERNMENT MY FAVORITE!!!!
>>539900262Your claim about anal sex being associated with sepsis, or even low grade pathogen invasion past the portal system is unsubstantiated. I have seen no evidence of there being anal sex specific mortality at the level you are contending, much less at a level that is necessarily for a trait to be generally deleterious at a population level. I can just grant for the sake of argument that you are correct about there being harm associated with fecal contamination. I can even for the sake of argument say that this is 100% lethal for both parties. You still don’t arrived at the trait itself being deleterious prima facia. The p-value of association between the glutamate transporter and the homosexual phenotype is 10-8, which is a very significant association. The probability of the homosexual phenotype being by caused by something beside the gene and independent of it given the apparent association actually observed is only about 0.0000001. That also means that the homosexual trait is truly ancient as this is a gene conserved across multiple mammalian species. IF your feces contamination argument was valid, then evolution would have already drove the trait to fixation; but this did not happen even across multiple mammalian lines. So, even if let’s say 100% of homosexual men died from anal sex, which is what happens in the eyes of evolution since homosexuals do not reproduce anyways, then you still have no overcome the basic concept that nature considers it worthwhile even with the lethality. Any harm to the homosexual is irrelevant for the trait to be advantageous from a population level.
>>539900262Also gays are not the leading population of antibiotic use. Adult women are
The anus of women is the gateway to heaven
>>539887171>definitive act of biohazardy that causes damage, disease, and harm to the general health of the public in every instance it is committedyou are seeing speck (buttsex), but missed the log (vax)
>>539902855Women are both the main beneficiaries of the healthcare system and the main employees. Weird, almost like, a closed economy
>>539900262What I said is that you are making a category error. You are trying to naturalize irrealis language. You can’t intelligently talk about what should, could, would, or ought to be regarding the natural world without some non-real measuring rod. The natural world, id est quod id est. The very fact that homosexuality exists, is associated with a heritable genetic sequence and is advantageous, is just the indicative reality of nature.
>>539903138>My feces fissures is a natural rightNo you're just a freak
>>539903253Rights don’t exist, and neither do freaks. This is what I men about this argument usually becoming a category error. It’s inappropriate to assume that linguistic structures, would, could, rights, law, etc exist in the natural world. The natural world is just what it is. The best biology is going to do here is explain the mechanism
>>539903426>Live in a country that says there's God given rights>I want one of these to be anal fissures >No>Okay rights don't exist I'm going to keep getting anal fissuresHave you considered suicide?
>>539887171>bring back sodomy lawsBlowjobs are also sodomy. The mouth is not a sex organ. Ban blowjobs.
>>539903509It’s not about “wanting” or any irrealis construction. It just is what it is. This trait existed before the invention of the subjunctive grammatical mood…
>>539903746You're appealing to natural rights. You know back when there were tribal rights you could kill a man for calling you gay
>>539887171Congratulations on being as obsessed with anal sex as a homosexual is without actually partaking in it yourself (supposedly). I wouldn't be surprised if you had terrabytes of sodomy videos saved as "research materials" along with a computer screen dedicated to playing them 24/7 and enough baby oil to put Diddy to shame.
>>539903539Pregnant women ingesting semen have lower incidence of preeclampsia complications, so straight oral sex can actually be beneficial in a certain context.
>>539903840I am not applying to rights whatsoever.
>>539887171ThisWe need to adopt the old Aztec way:Bottoms: disembowled through the anusTops: Impaled through the anusLesbians: Death by garrote
>>539903840We are talking about a phenomenon that is primordial and older than good and evil. Rights have basically nothing to do with the etiology of homosexuality or its place in nature.
>>539903895You're appealing to "nature". So did the liberals. They were describing tribal rights. Locke coped with this by saying they were God given. What was "natural" in pre Christian society? Murdering gays, adulterers. There's not a single anthropological argument for Jewish sodomite feminism. Gays literally have to talk about gorillas in the zoo on Xanax eating their own shit
>>539902602You are moving the goalpost to full-on spesis while ignoring the obvious outsized representation in statistics about antibiotic use, STDs,and HIV infections while ignoring the 1-to-1 obvious cause of it in gay men relative to the general population: their practice of sodomy that gets feces directly into the bloodstream via the abrased colon and anus as well as the hyperpermable tissues of the glans and scrotum during the act. Also the fact that nearly all cases of pre-geriatric incontinence and prolapse are also in this miniscule population.The act of sodomy is definitively biohazardous. This act of condemnation of the act is bioethical, not prejudicious or based in any moral or social purviews that are subjective but objective truth about the activity. No human of any proclivity should partake in it, there are multitudes of safe means of physical intimacy that do not involve the fecal orifice. Sodomy must be condemned at a minimum at the level of smoking (institutional and public condemnation) and if possible, made illegal in the same vein as purposeful HIV infection(2 consenting adults can infect eachother with HIV but it is still a crime regardless because it is biohazardry).>>539903096The vax isn't on trial here. We are talking about the bioethics of improving human hygiene and upholding bioethics by condemning sodomy universally. >>539903539We aren't talking biblical sodomy, medical sodomy, which is penetration of the anus via a phallus or dildo. Oral and manual stimulation of sex organs aren't definitive biohazardry unless you're already infected with something. Sodomy is getting feces and gut bacteria directly into your bloodstream.
>>539888104a study was done on the unconscious reaction to faggots. How did religions with disparate origins all come to have some level of homophobia? It's in our DNA to hate that which is disgusting. Like rotting meat, homosexuals are breeding grounds for sickness.>“Participants watched a series of slideshows: male couples kissing, male couples holding hands, mixed-sex couples kissing, mixed-sex couples holding hands, boring images (e.g., paper clips) and disgusting images (maggots),” Blair explained. “In between slide shows, we asked participants questions about their responses to the photos (not yet published) and we also collected saliva samples in order to assess salivary alpha-amylase in response to each slide show (the current paper).”>Measuring levels of salivary alpha-amylase, a digestive enzyme that is associated with stress and is especially responsive to disgust, allowed the researchers to examine the men’s physiological reaction to the photos. The study was based on results from 120 heterosexual men (aged 18 to 45).>“In comparing the salivary alpha-amylase responses of participants to the various slideshows, we found that participants had higher salivary alpha-amylase responses to the images of two men kissing and the disgusting images. In both cases, these responses were significantly different than the responses they had to the neutral stimuli.”
>>539904557It's true, it's disgusting. Faggots are disgusting.Probably the reason for the Fermi paradox why we don't see aliens is faggots destroy all alien civilizations (species usually go extinct due to homosexuals taking over like we see today).
>>539904357I’m not actually making any appeals. The OP was intentionally trying to construct a moral, an irrealis mood, argument against homosexuality on the basis of a naturalistic consequence to the behavior. I was pointing out how this endeavor is doomed because nature itself considers the trait advantageous, technically, even though it has essentially lethal consequence to male expressors. Nature considers the benefits the gene gives to women to be much, much more important than the few sons who get the homogyzous condition. The fertility benefit in women is seen in the heterozygous condition. My intuition as a professional biologist would be that no level of consequence to the male line would be severe enough for evolution to select against it.
>>539904394I granted your entire harm premise. Even if everything you say is true, nature will still consider homosexuality advantageous and the gene will continue to grow in frequency. Nature will undermine any efforts made to oppress the homosexuals. It would be an ongoing process of continuous political turmoil. You can’t defeat a gene that is carried by about 5-10% of all women worldwide and is increasing in frequency over each generation.
>>539904685>i was not appealing to natural rights>homo is naturally advantageousyoure in a cult that calls themselves liberals so they dont get ventilated but you practice bolshevik revolutionary jew sodomy. thats why you say youre not appealing to nature while appealing to nature
>>539904394AND also, here is the actual challenge to your premise, IF what you claim is true, and the consequences severe enough to threaten society and human communal dwelling, then evolution would have driven the gene to fixation MILLIONS of years ago. Before the invention of modern medicine, gays would have died at even larger numbers than they do today, as you say overrepresented in infections, and yet the apparent harm and death to the group must not have been severe enough for evolution to have cared, as it choose to actually amplify the gay trait, so it’s likely not severe at all and probably a nothingburger.
>>539904901Explaining what nature is and how it functions does mean im appealing to it morally
>>539902996can someone press the red button on this species please
>>539905177but not liberal morality how odd, where did you get your morality system if not from the us
>>539887171Literally the truth.It is a bio-hazard, a lot of money goes into then healing sodomites under government contracts.Doctors and the entire medical system make a lot of money with it via fraud, but the result is that economy is worse for everyone(literally everyone).
>>539888104>Your ancients likely saw a similar trend that sodomy produced no offspring and caused disease, hence it was seen as "cursed" and called for its prohibition.WITH THE DEATH PENALTY>Leviticus 20:13 King James Version>13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
>>539904869May we see the gene that causes homosexuality?
>>539905329I’m deliberately not speaking about morality whatsoever. In my personal opinion, I think there is an operating logical principle that governs all of nature which is intelligible. Nature, language, art, and so on are icons of this logos. Evolutionary systems maximize fitness over time. That is the logical principle through which this system is governed. In nature’s pursuit of fitness for the human population, it has selected these genes that OP is now insisting are deleterious. Nature has already judged it, considered the consequences, and decided it was advantageous in the pursuit of greater human fitness anyways.
>>539905686https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34518958/
>>539905741so youre a gay transhumanist? maybe call yourselves that instead of liberals
>>539905818That’s not transhumanism. That is just evolutionary biology
>>539887171SUPERSPREADERS MUST BE PROTECTED!!!https://www.brighteon.com/9e5a2abc-cf81-4d8d-8a1e-62786602b9d6
>>539905851if you were right you wouldnt need to pretend like youre somehow advanced. did you drink too much "gays are super smart" propaganda from the glowniggers
>>539905964I am a published professional molecular biologist. This is also an advanced topic
>>539906200did you get the job because youre gay
>>539905817Conclusion stated by authors: male sexual orientation is influenced by environmental and complex genetic factors, and this work is a step toward understanding the biology of associated traits like CGN (Childhood Gender Nonconformity).Not really a "gene that causes homosexuality."
>>539906275I invented a new molecular tool to induce whole genome duplications in angiosperms. My technology and protocols have created many new plant species
>>539906377You missed my interpretation. In genetics you almost never get simple causations, it’s a complex system, but what you do get is claims about independence. What we can say with high statistical confidence is that: The probability of there existing another explanation INDEPENDENT of the gene, given the gene association that is actually observed in the wild, is 0.0000001. It’s not saying that the gene causes it, but it is saying that it’s not gonna happen without the gene.
>>539906428are you able to change the results or are they widely accepted to be universal changes
>>539904869>Continue to grow in frequencySelf-identification and actual participation are two different metrics. While ~20% of people age 16-22 identify as LGBT, that doesn't align with the actual percentages of those actually being gay, which stays at about 2% which is where it has been roughly since we started tracking it back in the 50s.Homosexuality is NOT a genetic outcome. We have 70 years of twin studies proving definitively homosexuality is not purely genetic. Enviroment, diet, & exposure to unnatural pheromones are at play for the persistence of homosexuality in population. It is loosely correlated with specific genes but it not anywhere close to being a genetic cause and is more socially ensconced and environmental than anythingYou keep acting like my contention to condemn sodomy is oppression of homosexual, it is the opposite. It is the bioethical care for all humans of all proclivities. They can express their physical intimacy in a multitude of ways that don't involve the fecal orifice. The practice must be condemned to the same level as smoking cigarettes as it is equally as caustic to life expectancy in gay men and worse draws us closer to antibiotic resistant bacteria proliferation>evolution would have driven the geneAre you attempting to convey evolutionary shifts in prominent micropopulations that don't reproduce? Thats beyond folly. The twin studies confirm that homosexuals are not purely or even majority genetic in cause of their proclivity. You are believing in some "born this way" pop culture myth that is disproved by the scientific data. But peoples proclivities aren't on trial here. Its the practice they majority participate in that causes biohazardry Gays do die, and don't breed in sufficient numbers to effect the gene pool at all, and even so we are talking a microscosm of evolution in our ~2000 years of denoting them.Gays do suffer more illnesses, produce & spread more disease, & die much earlier even in developed countries.
>>539906377Also, for the purposes of 4chan and for the matter modern psychiatry, these neurotransmitter transmembrane transporters might as well be causative agents. Modern pharmacology ultimate just accepts that these proteins might as well be the causes of complex psychological phenomena.
>>539905428The problem is that the persistence of the practice harms the participants lowering their hygiene, health, and life expectancy while spreading diseases and wasting precious antibiotics. It must be condemned, straight, gay, or any proclivity, the act of sodomy is biohazard.>>539905448But you see that the condemnation of sodomy was an ancient conclusion brought on by observable results over generations like incest right? That there was and is a definitive biological reason for its prohibition. It isn't just arbitrarily deemed so by God. Science proves what the ancients could only gleam through generational trial and error.>>539905928I feel like you're trying to make a point but you just posted pure schizophrenia on some unknown video platform.
>>539887358Correct. It's just funny that even the atheist who denies sin can't deny the logic of sodomy being vile and unnatural. They always try to say "religious idiots" oppose gays for superstition when clearly religion isn't the only thing that makes faggotry unacceptable
>>539888104God's Word > reasoning describedBut the logos confirms God's Word
>>539906878When I say growing in frequency, I am talking about population genetics scale. The glutamate transporter polymorphism is ancient and either converged or is conserved across multiple fairly isolated lines. It is carried by approximately 5-10% of all human women. For that to happen, it would have needed to grow in frequency from the first progenitor to hundreds of millions of dispersed people. It is literally, technically impossible for a deleterious trait to do that. They don’t increase in frequency like that. And advantageous traits increase in frequency, by definition!
>>539906878I already provided you evidence at very high degree of statistical confidence that the homosexual trait is a genetic phenomenon. The gene bank has hundreds of millions of annotated sequences. You can look for a homosexual without the glutamate transporter if you’d like. I’m not paying the compute fee for it though. The paper says you’d have a better chance at the mega millions than finding what you’re looking for
>>539907628>The trait is advantageous because ...... Because it keeps happening!Nigga my appendix bout to erupt over your gay bullshit.
>>539906878The homosexual trait is also clearly a genetic phenomenon via the fecundity effect, we actually learn about this is undergraduate school because this was how this entire mechanism of asymmetric sex-specific fitness was discovered. See the fecundity effect, and then appreciate how a neurotransmitter, such as glutamate, which is excitatory in the mate selection region of hypothalamus, might encourage women to have more sex with men. The astute among you would also know that developmentally everyone starts out as female, so the excitation in men may activation dormant or repressed male-mate selection architecture active in women.
>>539907865That’s how this is actually done. It’s all computed by the allele frequency, not the prima fascia appearance of the trait. It’s why so many people have sickle cell trait even though sickle cell anemia is basically lethal. The sickle cell gene itself is advantageous anyways.
>>539908211youre talking about people getting epilepsy from a gene mutation being the equivalent of a homosexual? are fags mentally disabled?
>>539907827Your are stitching together a pseudo-scientific patchwork of misapplied statistics, cherry-picked biology, and an exaggerated "fecundity effect" to argue that homosexuality is a hardcoded, evolutionarily conserved genetic trait.>1. The P-Value and StatisticalMisinterpretation You heavily rely on a specific p-value ($10^-7 or $10^-8) to claim a near-absolute certainty that genetics dictate the traitYou are committing the prosecutor's fallacy confusing the probability of the data given the hypothesis with the probability of the hypothesis given the data.In modern GWAS, a p-value must typically cross 5 x 10^-8 just to achieve baseline genome-wide significance due to the millions of tests being run simultaneously. Individual candidate hits near 10^-7 routinely fail to replicate in independent, larger cohorts >2.You're conflating Animal Model Genes (Genderblind Fruit Fly)You are referencing genes involved in "mate selection and olfaction" and a "glutamate transporter family," likely gesturing toward famous animal studies—such as the genderblind mutant in fruit flies, where an amino-acid transporter mutation alters courtship behavior.Relying on invertebrate neurotransmitter pathways to explain complex human sexual orientation is reductionist. Fruit Flies lack a neocortex, complex social structures, culture, and individual psychology.In organisms like fruit flies, mutations in neural transporters don't program a "gay identity"; rather, they disrupt basic chemosensory processing, making the fly temporarily unable to distinguish sex-specific pheromones. Translating a temporary sensory confusion gene in a fruit fly into a blueprint for human sexuality is scientifically invalid.3. You're Ignoring Twin StudiesClassic twin studies (such as those by Bailey et al. and the massive 2019 GWAS published in Science covering hundreds of thousands of individuals) show that same-sex sexual behavior is only moderately heritable (roughly 8% to 25%).
>>539909232The Smoking Gun is if homosexuality were strictly or primarily genetic, identical twins (who share 100% of their DNA) would have a 100% concordance rate for sexual orientation. In reality, if one identical twin is homosexual, the other twin is heterosexual the majority of the time. This proves that non-genetic factors—such as developmental, epigenetic, and environmental influences—play a massive role, destroying any premise that a specific gene "causes" the phenotype.>4. The "Fecundity Effect" and Evolutionary Logic FallaciesYou are misinterpreting what a $p$-value actually means. A p-value of 10^-7 does not mean there is a 0.00000% chance your hypothesis is wrong—it simply means that if there were zero association, there's a one-in-ten-million chance of seeing that data by random luck. In real-world genetics, individual candidate associations at that level routinely fail to replicate in larger genome-wide studies. More importantly, you are completely ignoring the actual data from twin studies, which completely shatters your strict genetic model. If homosexuality were hardcoded by genes, identical twins—who share 100 percent of their DNA—would have a 100 percent concordance rate. Instead, the data shows they are frequently discordant, proving that non-genetic and environmental factors play a massive role. You can't build a deterministic genetic argument while ignoring the exact empirical evidence that disproves it.Your contentions are pseudo-scientific and bridging gaps the science of 2026 couldn't even come close to making with our current data.
the sin of sodom was anti-semitism
>sub 90 iq"But poop comes from there!">100 iqLOVE IS LOVE>Greater than 110 iq"The fecal orifice is a biohazardSomeone please make this bell curve meme with tf2 scout, pauling, and the medic
>>539887171blowjobs are considered sodomy if you flip the pages of history back far enough. i wont be giving getting sloppy toppy road head from some slut up, so you better be more specific in your language, if you want my support.
>>539912013OP has said like 30 times medical sodomy aka buttfucking, not blowjobs or handjobs
>>539906878When we do GWAS in humans, since we have a completed and sequenced human genome and large gene bank, we know the prior posterior probability. In our case it’s 1:5000, as humans have 5,000 functional neurogenes. Either way, it’s a 99.94% chance
>>539912292and OP should realize there are plenty of people who support banning ass fucking who would take that next step. medical or not.
>>539909344>> In real-world genetics, individual candidate associations at that level routinely fail to replicate in larger genome-wide studiesWe are speaking about a genome-wide study. We are also talking about a complex, possibly polygenic trait, with environmental factors, but the critical thing is that the other contributors are not independent of the heritable element by the GWAS data (99.95% chance is true).
>>539887171"General... It is as if you have given me a horde of feral pitbulls that understand orders and can (sort of) identify friend from foe. I fear I can't stop them, Felujah cowers before our might. The Scavs elect the smallest or most stoned of their number to be the "Bait boy" and the bait boy will, often begrudgingly as if having lost a bet wander into the doorway or open area. The first night four or five were shot, each time the keening cry of "RAT BAG!" Rang through the city, thermal imaging showed hordes of the Scavs descend upon the last known muzzle flash, and reports of screaming and wails as the scavs tortured the shooter to death.Grim and brutal, this swarming horde of rats, coupled with their daytime dalliance and "business" that would put the gayest bars in california to shame have had a truly stupendous effect on enemy morale. Civilians have all but abandoned the city as they believe that the sodomites have returned. Enemy snipers were notably quiet the next night, having learned that the scavs torture, eat and rape their victims, not always in that order. The red cross does not tend them and has largely stayed out of the conflict. We have had little fear of collateral damage, unless we count the scavs.Who, despite everything have maintained magnificent morale, in fact their commanders, who seem surprisingly educated and polite given the average scav infantryman do not appear to even consider morale to be a problem. They have probably saved more lives in this battle than any other invention of the century. If you do not count the scavs themselves, their losses have been horrific. Morale has never been higher, even among the scavs. Notably the term "Fagrat" has become common. It may be rude but the term has spread among the scavs. Allegedly to be a "Fagrat" is an honor of some sort among them. >Your agent of war, >Col Niggerkike.
>>539909232You are astute and fundamentally correct imo to consider this rationale to be reductionist. I agree with you here, however, I will also emphasis that the orthodox opinion of clinicians and scientists is that complex behavioral traits can be reduced to differences in neurotransmitter-related physiology/anatomy. Even though this is not true, this assumption is the fundamental principal behind modern psychiatric drug pharmacy and research. The only psychiatric trait with a more significant genetic association is frankly really only schizophrenia with a p-association 10-50. We accept these neurotransmitter polymorphisms to be good enough models for causative agents that we design and administer drugs based on them. In fact, when you can associate a complex with directly to a neurotransmitter transporter protein, that is what we in the business call a smoking gun. It’s not some weird thing that no body knows what the hell it does.
>>539912686Granted, to make grandiose claims about genetic determinism, they want this number to have many more .9/, but imo that’s an artificial standard imposed to keep GWAS from associating complex traits with race.
>>539914438regardless of your extreme hyperbolization in an attempt to make a genetic case for homosexuality which is patently disproven as I addressed above, you are tangenting from the actual contention of my point, which isn't biological determinism of any aspect of homosexuality itself as an innate aspect genetic, social, or cultural proclivity. It is that ultimate, the act, sodomy, is a biohazardous act that inevitably causes harm, disease, and wastes precious antibiotics. Regardless of proclivity, gay, straight, bi, or whatever socio-cultural label you attach to your relationships, NOBODY should be partaking in sodomy ever at any point. Anyone of any proclivity is perfectly within their bounds to partake in the multitude of forms of physical human intimacy that can be touching, hugging, kissing, oral stimulation of the sex organs, manual stimulation of the sex organs, consummation of male-female sex organs. Or whatever fantasy therewithin you want to do as consenting adults. But any activity that involves the fecal orifice and feces should be condemned at a minimum and prohibited if legally possible.
