Penguins and Perversion Pt. I

I hate penguins...

I find them offensive, and loathsome.

Foul little beasts...

They are so adorable it makes me sick. The penguin also provides me with proof that evolution is false. When will they ever evolve to leave their harsh existence for warmer, less miserable, climates? And will they ever cease from the relentless onslaught of all the "observe penguin life" films (March of the Penguins, Happy Feet, etc)?

I heard about this article from a friend of mine, and I must say, it took me quite a bit of searching to find it. These things usually don't find their way on to the front page news. Now, we have this children's book "A Tango Makes Three" which is about two male penguins raising a female penguin scrat in a N.Y. zoo. How spectacular! 

We know for a certainty they did not birth it into existence. Well, who knows in this day and age, clones and all? Joking! But seriously, it isn't like 2 dude penguins saw each other one day, fell in love, found this little penguin chick, and lived happily ever after. They are in a ZOO! It is not the common course of events in nature. In some animal circles, the pack exhibits extreme prejudice against one with homosexual tendencies.  Another important fact they neglect to mention is that these so called tendencies many times are nothing more then consensual incest among prides, or packs, for procreation to the furtherance of continued survival in extreme, prey-deprived, harsh lands.

Gay rights scientist have suggested that the "crime against nature" argument is invalid because of about 450 individual creatures that they have found to have homosexual behavior. You have to think about these numbers though. These 450 individual creatures are picked out of millions of creatures which have been selected from 1,000 to 3,000 species. Most are from the insect, and bird groups, and having close ancestry within their own groups. So in their eyes, homosexual behavior among the fruit fly, justifies their acts.

What they don't tell you also is most of it is just animal "behavior". They don't tell you that they aren't tapping into the other 50,000 plus species that include trillions of living creatures that exhibit normal heterosexual behaviors. In the scale of things in the animal kingdom, the subjects found to have homosexual behavior are nothing more than a speck, or what some may classify as very rare.  It is a moot point anyway. 

Animals can't determine law, and penalty. They have no discernment of sin or righteousness. They are insects, birds, fish and a few obscure animals that they have singled out to attempt to scientifically back their way of life. Many of these cases were like the 3  penguins in the Bronx. They are placed in isolation with same-sex partners over long periods of time to be studied. So, there will most likely be a bond that develops over time between the test subjects. That is all these wicked men will need to have approval for their next grant to continue government funded research into animals and homosexual studies all while using our tax money.

One advocate of the "gay nature" argument stated:

"Homosexual behavior is not only common, but even more common in other species than in humans. While numbers are hard to come by, there are a few that present some interesting patterns."

These men and women that do this research are quite literally void of common sense. Of course this man's quote would be the case. I find it funny how in the actual research article, very little proof or footnotes are provided. Par for the course I suppose.

Do you realize how many species of fish life, insect life, bird life, and mammal life there are out there? We are STILL discovering new species and life on planet Earth for that matter. So we have quite literally trillions of innumerable, created beings on this planet compared to a few 6 billion humans on this planet. Then out of those "trillion" they pick 450? Don't be naive. Most of these people will lie, steal, cheat, and in a few cases, even kill to bring in their homosexual kingdom (agenda). This "animal" argument simply does not stand as a valid point of debate, as most of their contested statements.

Wow, that was quite the rabbit trail. 

Enough with the penguin nonsense...