Difference between revisions of "Talk:Homosexuality in animals myth"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(this seems like an essay rather than an entry: new section)
(Title: new section)
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
It takes a position and argues for it, rather than simply laying out facts, that is essay territory isn't it? --[[User:CJHallock|CJHallock]] 22:50, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
 
It takes a position and argues for it, rather than simply laying out facts, that is essay territory isn't it? --[[User:CJHallock|CJHallock]] 22:50, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Title ==
 +
 +
According to the article on [[Homosexuality]], it is a "sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex." Following this definition, it wouldn't really matter what some people say in the quotes in this article. Homosexuality, as in sexual desire towards individuals of the same sex, has been observed and exists among animals. In view of this ''fact'', why is the article called "Homosexality in animals myth"? [[User:Crucialwood|Crucialwood]] 12:01, 19 July 2009 (EDT)

Revision as of 11:01, 19 July 2009

This is substantially the same as the section in Homosexuality. Let's not maintain two versions of the same info.

Either delete this article, or use it as a template for the big article. --Ed Poor Talk 17:37, 13 October 2007 (EDT)

this seems like an essay rather than an entry

It takes a position and argues for it, rather than simply laying out facts, that is essay territory isn't it? --CJHallock 22:50, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

Title

According to the article on Homosexuality, it is a "sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex." Following this definition, it wouldn't really matter what some people say in the quotes in this article. Homosexuality, as in sexual desire towards individuals of the same sex, has been observed and exists among animals. In view of this fact, why is the article called "Homosexality in animals myth"? Crucialwood 12:01, 19 July 2009 (EDT)