Bill Nye The Idiot Guy

[seer]

So you knew about exclusive homosexuality in domestic sheep, but chose to pretend it did not exist.

What did I say to Tass:

and can you show me any animal that is exclusively sexual with the same sex, that never mates with the opposite sex? I only know of one.

The sheep was the one I was speaking of, but domestic sheep don't really count - do they. And you are the one who called whiptails homosexual when they are no such thing.

[HMS_Beagle]

the fact that we don't find exclusive homosexuality in the animal kingdom.

But these "exclusive" situations are rare,

Do you see the direct contradiction in your two statements?

[seer]

Do you see the direct contradiction in your two statements?

I did say: there is exclusive homosexual behavior depending on how you define it. Do male swans mate - anally copulate?


So my first statement may have been premature or incorrect. Of course, just because we find it in the animal kingdom says nothing about whether it is morally acceptable or not.

[Roy]

What did I say to Tass:

and can you show me any animal that is exclusively sexual with the same sex, that never mates with the opposite sex? I only know of one.

The sheep was the one I was speaking of, ...

So when you wrote "we don't find exclusive homosexuality in the animal kingdom" you knew it was incorrect, and when you wrote "can you show me any animal that is exclusively sexual with the same sex" you already knew of one.

That is, if your claim to have been referring to sheep when you wrote "I only know of one" is believed.

... but domestic sheep don't really count - do they.

Do you think domestic sheep are plants or fungi?

And you are the one who called whiptails homosexual when they are no such thing.

They have to mate with other females in order to stimulate egg production. That the gender of their partner is enforced does not render their behaviour non-homosexual.

[Wally]

Why, my left handedness was changed with no ill effect, and you compared homosexuality to left handedness.

It appears to have had a negative affect on your critical thinking skills.

[seer]

So when you wrote "we don't find exclusive homosexuality in the animal kingdom" you knew it was incorrect, and when you wrote "can you show me any animal that is exclusively sexual with the same sex" you already knew of one.

But I did not count that because there was no evidence that we find that behavior in wild sheep. It may be the result of human interference, years of breeding.

They have to mate with other females in order to stimulate egg production. That the gender of their partner is enforced does not render their behaviour non-homosexual.

Is their reproduction asexual or not?

[seer]

It appears to have had a negative affect on your critical thinking skills.

Given our last little exchange Wally that is the pot calling the kettle black.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post438337

[Starlight]

Of course, just because we find it in the animal kingdom says nothing about whether it is morally acceptable or not.

Since you are now backing off from claiming this is relevant, why did you bring it up in the first place?

As far as I am aware, homosexual sex has been observed occurring in over 1500 animal species at last count, pretty much every species in the animal kingdom has been observed in homosexual behavior at some point or another. Among species that mate for life, the Laysan albatross commonly forms life-long female-female pairings. Those pairs reproduce by one of them having sex with a male and then the female-female pair raise the offspring. Black Swans seem to favor male-male pairings as this allows them to defend greater territory as the males are more aggressive, and the male-male pair will steal an egg from the nest of another pair and then raise it as their own, and that egg has a better survival rate because the two males can defend more territory and so make for better parents. Macaques, bonobos, lions, giraffes, and sheep, seem to be the most common of the large animals to engage in homosexual behavior. Roughly 90% of times when giraffes mount each other it will be two males having anal sex, and at any given time in a herd 5% of males will be giving each other friendly sexual neck-rubs. Bighorn sheep are a type of wild sheep that has a lot of male-male anal sex. Homosexual orientation has also been noted in domesticated sheep, as discussed.

Though, honestly, I think animals are irrelevant. At the end of the day, if two humans fall in love and are consenting adults and make a life together, then that's that. You sticking your nose into their business at that point is somewhere on the spectrum from rude to criminally stalkerish to breaching human rights.

[seer]

Since you are now backing off from claiming this is relevant, why did you bring it up in the first place?

Tass brought it up.

As far as I am aware, homosexual sex has been observed occurring in over 1500 animal species at last count, pretty much every species in the animal kingdom has been observed in homosexual behavior at some point or another. Among species that mate for life, the Laysan albatross commonly forms life-long female-female pairings. Those pairs reproduce by one of them having sex with a male and then the female-female pair raise the offspring. Black Swans seem to favor male-male pairings as this allows them to defend greater territory as the males are more aggressive, and the male-male pair will steal an egg from the nest of another pair and then raise it as their own, and that egg has a better survival rate because the two males can defend more territory and so make for better parents. Macaques, bonobos, lions, giraffes, and sheep, seem to be the most common of the large animals to engage in homosexual behavior. Roughly 90% of times when giraffes mount each other it will be two males having anal sex, and at any given time in a herd 5% of males will be giving each other friendly sexual neck-rubs. Bighorn sheep are a type of wild sheep that has a lot of male-male anal sex. Homosexual orientation has also been noted in domesticated sheep, as discussed.

Like I suggested, we do not get our morality from the animal kingdom. Then what do we make of these acts. A dog will jump on your leg, what does any of that mean except to say that animals are not very discriminating. And I did not argue that there wasn't homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom, but whether there was exclusive homosexuality. That as my quote from LeVay suggested is rare.

Simon LeVay introduced the further caveat that "[a]lthough homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homose...ior_in_animals

[Tassman]

Why, my left handedness was changed with no ill effect, and you compared homosexuality to left handedness.

Natural left-handers should be left to develop in their own way. Forcing them to change hands and write right-handed can have ill-effects in later life. And why attempt to make them change at all?

And you did not comment on the fact that we don't find exclusive homosexuality in the animal kingdom.

[Sea of red]

Tass brought it up.




Like I suggested, we do not get our morality from the animal kingdom. Then what do we make of these acts. A dog will jump on your leg, what does any of that mean except to say that animals are not very discriminating. And I did not argue that there wasn't homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom, but whether there was exclusive homosexuality. That as my quote from LeVay suggested is rare.

You're being unreasonable.

You say homosexuality is unnatural, then when we give you examples of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom, you move the goal post to orientation. There is no such thing as an 'orientation' in the animal kingdom anymore than there is of marriage -- these are human ideas. Most animals have multiple partners, and many (perhaps most) of them are willing to engage in intercourse with both sexes, so they'd actual be pansexual. The animals that engage in homosexuality tend to form long lasting same-sex relationships with their partners much like humans. But my hunch is that even if I were to go digging this literature up for you to read it wouldn't satisfy you, and you'd just move the goal post again.

These are the same games you've played discussing abortion, climate change, cosmology, evolution, morality, and a host of other subjects where you waste peoples time.

[seer]

You're being unreasonable.

You say homosexuality is unnatural, then when we give you examples of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom, you move the goal post to orientation.

Where did I say that homosexuality was unnatural?

There is no such thing as an 'orientation' in the animal kingdom anymore than there is of marriage -- these are human ideas. Most animals have multiple partners, and many (perhaps most) of them are willing to engage in intercourse with both sexes, so they'd actual be pansexual. The animals that engage in homosexuality tend to form long lasting same-sex relationships with their partners much like humans. But my hunch is that even if I were to go digging this literature up for you to read it wouldn't satisfy you, and you'd just move the goal post again.

I don't have a problem with much of this. The only thing I questioned was about exclusiveness, which as the quote from Dr. LeVay suggested was rare.

These are the same games you've played discussing abortion, climate change, cosmology, evolution, morality, and a host of other subjects where you waste peoples time.

Then why are you even in my thread?

[seer]

Natural left-handers should be left to develop in their own way. Forcing them to change hands and write right-handed can have ill-effects in later life. And why attempt to make them change at all?

Nonsense, there have been no ill effects because they trained me to be right handed. The only difference is that I can still bat and shoot both right and left handed - which I would think is an advantage.


Yet rape, or forced sex, as a sexual behavior, is also "natural" and found in humans and animals.

https://kashmirobserver.net/2017/hea...gdom-too-13741

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociob...eories_of_rape

[Tassman]

Nonsense, there have been no ill effects because they trained me to be right handed. The only difference is that I can still bat and shoot both right and left handed - which I would think is an advantage.

There is literature on the harm caused by forcing left-handed people to use their right hand. But my question was why try to change them at all?

Yet rape, or forced sex, as a sexual behavior, is also "natural" and found in humans and animals.

Anti-social, destructive behaviour has always been proscribed by communities, it''s detrimental to social cohesion.

[seer]

There is literature on the harm caused by forcing left-handed people to use their right hand. But my question was why try to change them at all?

I'm not saying you should change left handedness, only that is doesn't cause harm. At least it didn't for me.

Anti-social, destructive behaviour has always been proscribed by communities, it''s detrimental to social cohesion.

But that makes no sense, in groups of dolphins or higher primates, or other species, where forced sex is regularly practiced there is no obvious loss of social cohesion. Their societies still thrive. As a matter a fact as my second link suggests rape may offer a real adaptive advantage.