403 réponses à ce sujet

[Permutation]

Don't tell me this is the same rampant fangirl anti-PC xbox elitist redsh1ft from the old forums. Bwahahaha.

[Medhia Nox]

So we can develope the "Kwisatz Haderach" - Redshift wants us to practice selective breeding.



Honestly - I could get behind this, but as it is Redshift our species just breeds randomly producing more and more garbage. Your idea might have merit if breeders were forced to get liscences and then be ordered to mate selectively. This would also mean that those deemed "unfit" would not be allowed to bare children. A little Orwellian... I like it.



You are aware that homosexuals are still capable of baring/conceiving children right Redshift? Many gay males donate to sperm banks - many lesbian women bare children.

[lyssalu]

ReDSH1FT wrote...

This is just me, but the reason I'm against homos is because it's selfish. I'm a huge naturalist, and I'm well aware that it isn't just humans operating like this, that other species do it sometimes as well. I would call them selfish as well, because they are not furthering the main purpose of biological life; the act of surviving the species.

NO evolution can come from homosexual partnership, nothing can be gained for the greater of the species. All that happens is two men or women fulfill their fantasies, not caring AT ALL of humanity as a whole. Kind of like the whole Asari / Asari couple. The species gains nothing from it. Selfish people really.

Is this thought out enough for you?

i think it's more apt to say that those who choose to have their own children as opposed to adopting those who are holed up in an overpopulated adoption agency are selfish; your reasoning is ignorant.

[ITSSEXYTIME]

ReDSH1FT wrote...

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

ReDSH1FT wrote...

This is just me, but the reason I'm against homos is because it's selfish. I'm a huge naturalist, and I'm well aware that it isn't just humans operating like this, that other species do it sometimes as well. I would call them selfish as well, because they are not furthering the main purpose of biological life; the act of surviving the species.

NO evolution can come from homosexual partnership, nothing can be gained for the greater of the species. All that happens is two men or women fulfill their fantasies, not caring AT ALL of humanity as a whole. Kind of like the whole Asari / Asari couple. The species gains nothing from it. Selfish people really.

Is this thought out enough for you?

An interesting perspective.

My question is this: Does every action you take contribute directly to your own procreation and genetic survival?  Do you also object to people who don't procreate whether because of social isolation or religious beliefs? (Eg never get married thus never have sex)

Also, yes, I do have a problem with isolationism and beliefs playing into the whole thing.  I would be very sad to learn some brilliant scientists died without ever having children, whom they could have raised with all their knowledge.  And as for religious beliefs... ehh... it's hard to make any point against that without raising red flags.

Fair enough.

Consistency in beliefs is an admirable quality, and although I disagree personally there's nothing inherently wrong with your perspective.

[pharos_gryphon]

ReDSH1FT wrote...

There's nothing wrong with recreational sex.  Let me clear my point up a bit.
Basically, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with ****** encounters of any sort, but the moment that they commit to never engage in any hetero reproduction, that's when it becomes a problem.
If you're a really smart and talented homosexual, at least have the decency to pass that along to your species.
Does that make more sense?

I think this is more an issue of Nature vs Nurture though.  Theoretically, that same couple could adopt a disadvantaged or neglected child.  Or they could be teachers.  Or they could fill any number of other inspirational or societal roles in which they could pass on what they've learned and influence future generations.  BUT, that's an entirely different topic, when the one we have is already way off topic as it is.

Onto the initial topic, since it's not been denied, I'm betting it's safe to assume that any inclusion will be a bisexual one at least in so far as both gender Shephards will have access to romance with the character.  Mind you, some small word changes here or there could make the character appear straight or gay for said Shephard's story just as easily, just that the economy of data and the efficiency of story would make it easier on Bioware's part if it were one character for both I should think.  So, again, I'm still betting on it being Thane.  Thoughts?

[Medhia Nox]

Yes, there is.



He seems to want everyone to just breed, breed, breed.



Inferior people breeding - is counter productive to the idea of "Smart, special people MUST breed".



Redshift, I recommend the movie "Idiocracy".

[DeathCultArm]

Many feel being *** is a domino effect. Being *** often leads to many transsexuals, and hermaphrodites, which tragically effect everyone. It also widespreads AID, and leads to many children being adopted, that should've been for normal couples. Also **** have no noteable contributions to society. The culture isn't a friendly one, and bad usually comes out of it. There are a thousands reasons



I'm not givng a personal opinion, i'm playing devils adviocate. I have many lesvian friends, and I argue the same thing to them.



Now if you add a *** charater alot of potential charatcer will think about alot fo that.

[jlb524]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Redshift, I recommend the movie "Idiocracy".

That is a good movie

[ReDSH1FT]

DQE001 wrote...

ReDSH1FT wrote...

Is this thought out enough for you?

No, it's not. It's actually another sign of ignorance. We can look at one of our nearest animal relatives, the bonobo, and see quite clearly how homosexual interactions within their social group eases tensions, reduces violence and fosters community. It's not a selfish behavior, but rather an enduring feature of the ****** and pan genus that provides some advantage to the propagating of genes. If nothing else, its a spandrel, the by-product of other adaptations that have made our species successful.

Try again.

I'm gonna debunk this nice and clear for you.

First off, your "another sign of ignorance" remark.  Please elaborate in DETAIL how that is a sign of ignorance.  If anything, I'm being far more rational than you.

Second.  Don't draw false parallels, it's a logical fallacy.  Just because the Bonobo behaves like that DOES NOT, I repeat DOES NOT equate to a premise for an argument for the propagation of homosexuality.

Third.  Again detail.  Your assumptions that it's a byproduct of other adaptations is SO unfounded that it's not even funny.  Where's the research behind this?  You are just tossing failing hypotheses at me.

So, kiddo, try again.

[Detsu]

I go take a dump and Red comes under fire for his ignorance of evolutionary mechanics.

Protip: homosexuality continues to exist despite homosexuals not reproducing for a reason.

Also Red, I notice in retrospect that you never commented on the summer of '07 or my explanation for my name.

EDIT: teehee, he's calling people who disagree with him "kid" again. Oh Red, you so silly. And cancerous.

Modifié par Detsu, 19 janvier 2010 - 04:38 .

[TheAnima]

Redshift, I recommend the movie "Idiocracy".

A good comedy, but has little basis in reality.

[ReDSH1FT]

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

ReDSH1FT wrote...

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

ReDSH1FT wrote...

This is just me, but the reason I'm against homos is because it's selfish. I'm a huge naturalist, and I'm well aware that it isn't just humans operating like this, that other species do it sometimes as well. I would call them selfish as well, because they are not furthering the main purpose of biological life; the act of surviving the species.

NO evolution can come from homosexual partnership, nothing can be gained for the greater of the species. All that happens is two men or women fulfill their fantasies, not caring AT ALL of humanity as a whole. Kind of like the whole Asari / Asari couple. The species gains nothing from it. Selfish people really.

Is this thought out enough for you?

An interesting perspective.

My question is this: Does every action you take contribute directly to your own procreation and genetic survival?  Do you also object to people who don't procreate whether because of social isolation or religious beliefs? (Eg never get married thus never have sex)

Also, yes, I do have a problem with isolationism and beliefs playing into the whole thing.  I would be very sad to learn some brilliant scientists died without ever having children, whom they could have raised with all their knowledge.  And as for religious beliefs... ehh... it's hard to make any point against that without raising red flags.

Fair enough.

Consistency in beliefs is an admirable quality, and although I disagree personally there's nothing inherently wrong with your perspective.

Thank you for a very friendly and thought out conversation.  You are a credit to our species, unlike some others in here.

[Mister Mage]

ReDSH1FT wrote...Also, yes, I do have a problem with isolationism and beliefs playing into the whole thing.  I would be very sad to learn some brilliant scientists died without ever having children, whom they could have raised with all their knowledge.  And as for religious beliefs... ehh... it's hard to make any point against that without raising red flags.

The problem is that this isn't how it works.  We are not born with any knowledge from our parents.  We as specimens are not drastically different biologically from each other in the sense that all people from a later generation have improvements compared to the last one.  And why would the scientist need to transfer his knowledge to a child, specifically their own offspring?  By teaching ANYONE, and by leaving behind records of their discoveries and insights, they will have improved the future without needing to birth a child in the process.

Every child is not superior to their parents, it's not really a solid upward progression.

[ReDSH1FT]

Detsu wrote...

I go take a dump and Red cmes under fire for his ignorance of evolutionary mechanics.

Protip: homosexuality continues to exist despite homosexuals not reproducing for a reason.

Also Red, I notice in retrospect that you never commented on the summer of '07 or my explanation for my name.

EDIT: teehee, he's calling people who disagree with him "kid" again. Oh Red, you so silly. And cancerous.

Honestly I thought you left with your tail tucked between your legs.  If you didn't, now would be a good time.

 I'm done talking about chan with you, because we both know that it will go nowhere besides both of us calling each other names.  Also, I think you gain all your knowledge from ED.

If you're done, read my posts and make a logical counter argument.

[ITSSEXYTIME]

DeathCultArm wrote...

Many feel being *** is a domino effect. Being *** often leads to many transsexuals, and hermaphrodites, which tragically effect everyone. It also widespreads AID, and leads to many children being adopted, that should've been for normal couples. Also **** have no noteable contributions to society. The culture isn't a friendly one, and bad usually comes out of it. There are a thousands reasons

I'm not givng a personal opinion, i'm playing devils adviocate. I have many lesvian friends, and I argue the same thing to them.

Now if you add a *** charater alot of potential charatcer will think about alot fo that.

Now you're just expressing more ignorance.

Homosexuality leads to more transsexuals and hermaphrodites?  First of all hermaphrodites are born that way and it is a genetic defect, and transsexuals could exist regardless of homosexuality. There's no evidence to suggest that homosexuality results in more transsexual behaviour.  (more importantly, how does any of this "tragically affect everyone")  AIDS can be spread by both homosexual and heterosexual couples.  There's nothing wrong with a homosexual couple adopting a child, their sexuality does not prohibit the ability to be good parents.  I've seen many cases of heterosexual couples proving to be awful parents.  Heterosexuality doesn't improve your contributions to society and inversely homosexuality does not impede your ability to do so.  The culture is often hostile to anti-homosexual beliefs, but you can hardly blame them for it can you?  When you accuse them of spreading AIDS and not contributing anything to society you can be damn right they're going to be hostile.

Devils Advocate or no, you are arguing irrational, illogical and ignorant beliefs.  Many of your claims have no evidence to support them and your accusations are downright insulting to homosexual people, telling them that they can't be good parents and thusly don't deserve to adopt a child.

[TheAnima]

ReDSH1FT wrote...

Detsu wrote...

I go take a dump and Red cmes under fire for his ignorance of evolutionary mechanics.

Protip: homosexuality continues to exist despite homosexuals not reproducing for a reason.

Also Red, I notice in retrospect that you never commented on the summer of '07 or my explanation for my name.

EDIT: teehee, he's calling people who disagree with him "kid" again. Oh Red, you so silly. And cancerous.

Honestly I thought you left with your tail tucked between your legs.  If you didn't, now would be a good time.

 I'm done talking about chan with you, because we both know that it will go nowhere besides both of us calling each other names.  Also, I think you gain all your knowledge from ED.

If you're done, read my posts and make a logical counter argument.

Your passive aggressive comments are no less immature than the outright attacks of others, I hope you are aware.

[DeathCultArm]

What's the purpose? IDK why i'm here..I still don't understand..What the point? OK..some people are ***, and it's a minority....What else is there..?!

[Detsu]

ReDSH1FT wrote...

Detsu wrote...

I go take a dump and Red cmes under fire for his ignorance of evolutionary mechanics.

Protip: homosexuality continues to exist despite homosexuals not reproducing for a reason.

Also Red, I notice in retrospect that you never commented on the summer of '07 or my explanation for my name.

EDIT: teehee, he's calling people who disagree with him "kid" again. Oh Red, you so silly. And cancerous.

Honestly I thought you left with your tail tucked between your legs.  If you didn't, now would be a good time.

 I'm done talking about chan with you, because we both know that it will go nowhere besides both of us calling each other names.  Also, I think you gain all your knowledge from ED.

If you're done, read my posts and make a logical counter argument.

You should know by now that I don't make logical counter arguments when I don't feel like it. You haven't EARNED a logical counter. Just more generic commentary.

Oh, wait. Dash that. Look at that bold! That's a logical point indeed! Care to comment on why, exactly, homosexuality has consistently occurred since forever despite being less than conductive to babies? it almost seems like homosexuality must have some kind of evolutionary value!

Modifié par Detsu, 19 janvier 2010 - 04:44 .

[Schneidend]

DeathCultArm wrote...

Many feel being *** is a domino effect. Being *** often leads to many transsexuals, and hermaphrodites, which tragically effect everyone. It also widespreads AID, and leads to many children being adopted, that should've been for normal couples. Also **** have no noteable contributions to society. The culture isn't a friendly one, and bad usually comes out of it. There are a thousands reasons

What? There's nothing to back up ANY of that. Well, aside from the fact that homoesexual couples adopt children, I suppose.

Gays have no noteworthy contributions to society? Pick up a history book and look for some folks called the Greeks, who had a relatively advanced civilization while most of the rest of the world were still killing each other with rocks tied to sticks, and are notorious for pedophilia and recreational homosexuality.

[Permutation]

Why are you guys even arguing with this charlatan? He's got nothing but empty rhetoric to offer you.

[T1l]

Can someone please explain to me what the hell happened to the forums?

[TheAnima]

DeathCultArm wrote...

Many feel being *** is a domino effect. Being *** often leads to many transsexuals, and hermaphrodites, which tragically effect everyone. It also widespreads AID, and leads to many children being adopted, that should've been for normal couples. Also **** have no noteable contributions to society. The culture isn't a friendly one, and bad usually comes out of it. There are a thousands reasons

I'm not givng a personal opinion, i'm playing devils adviocate. I have many lesvian friends, and I argue the same thing to them.

Now if you add a *** charater alot of potential charatcer will think about alot fo that.

Let address these one by one.

Transsexuality and homosexuality have not been linked together, one deals with gender identity and the other with sexual attraction, these are related but independent of eachother.

There are no humans hermaphrodites. Intersex individuals have a genetic mutation that is uncommon in humans and has nothing to do with homosexuality.

AIDS is a disease that is spread by unprotected sex. Current social pressures make it more common for homosexuals to have unprotected sex, and so that is why is is more common in that group, however, this is a trend, and not a trait of either homosexuality or AIDS.

Modifié par TheAnima, 19 janvier 2010 - 04:46 .

[ITSSEXYTIME]

DeathCultArm wrote...

What's the purpose? IDK why i'm here..I still don't understand..What the point? OK..some people are ***, and it's a minority....What else is there..?!

I'm just trying to understand why you care if there is a homosexual love interest in the game, and how would it alienate you or anyone else who plays the game?

Would you be upset if a homosexual party member made advancement with your Shepard?  Does the mere OPTION of a homosexual love interest for people who want it upset you?

I absolutely agree that Bioware does not have to cater to any minority, but if they choose to do so why does it negatively affect you in any way, shape or form?

[Mister Mage]

DeathCultArm wrote...

What's the purpose? IDK why i'm here..I still don't understand..What the point? OK..some people are ***, and it's a minority....What else is there..?!

I find it odd how many muderous space marines there are.  With all the games with them as characters, pretty much everyone who plays games must be a space marine.  Gay characters, after all, can only exist in media for gay people.  Same must go for space marines.

Also Shepard is technically in the Navy, I know, but most space soldiers are in the Marines for some reason.

[DeathCultArm]

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

DeathCultArm wrote...

Many feel being *** is a domino effect. Being *** often leads to many transsexuals, and hermaphrodites, which tragically effect everyone. It also widespreads AID, and leads to many children being adopted, that should've been for normal couples. Also **** have no noteable contributions to society. The culture isn't a friendly one, and bad usually comes out of it. There are a thousands reasons

I'm not givng a personal opinion, i'm playing devils adviocate. I have many lesvian friends, and I argue the same thing to them.

Now if you add a *** charater alot of potential charatcer will think about alot fo that.

Now you're just expressing more ignorance.

Homosexuality leads to more transsexuals and hermaphrodites?  First of all hermaphrodites are born that way and it is a genetic defect, and transsexuals could exist regardless of homosexuality. There's no evidence to suggest that homosexuality results in more transsexual behaviour.  (more importantly, how does any of this "tragically affect everyone")  AIDS can be spread by both homosexual and heterosexual couples.  There's nothing wrong with a homosexual couple adopting a child, their sexuality does not prohibit the ability to be good parents.  I've seen many cases of heterosexual couples proving to be awful parents.  Heterosexuality doesn't improve your contributions to society and inversely homosexuality does not impede your ability to do so.  The culture is often hostile to anti-homosexual beliefs, but you can hardly blame them for it can you?  When you accuse them of spreading AIDS and not contributing anything to society you can be damn right they're going to be hostile.

Devils Advocate or no, you are arguing irrational, illogical and ignorant beliefs.  Many of your claims have no evidence to support them and your accusations are downright insulting to homosexual people, telling them that they can't be good parents and thusly don't deserve to adopt a child.

YES that is ignorance...just my point. Alot of people are ignorant and think that way. Adding a *** character in ME isn't going to change that. Which is why I don't see why anyone cares if the LI's are ***..

What is this thread even about anymore....The ***s v the non-gays..? ..I hate when forums get personal.