Gays are not married while in my home!

[Unkotare]

It is not a choice. I do suggest you read up on the subject. There most certainly is a gene or sequence of genes involved, ....

This is where you provide a link supporting your assertion.

Based on the evidence I've seen there is little doubt in my mind that being gay is not a conscious choice and they are born that way.

Could be, doesn't matter to me one way or the other. When someone insists on something very specific like the existence of a particular gene accounting for the 'condition,' it is incumbent upon that person to provide support for such an assertion, that's all.

It would seem plausible, given how difficult - and perilous - it has been at certain points in history to be so oriented, that it is an aspect of a person's makeup that they cannot change. However, when you hear about 40 - 50 year-old men and women leaving their marriages because they suddenly came to the realization that they are gay, you have to wonder. Were they 'pretending' for 50 years? Were they somehow suppressing a gene all their lives? Is it a gene that didn't 'kick-in' for them until so late in life? It is at least fair to say there are many questions. Whatever the answers, it still holds that whether or how gays are accepted in society is a social matter and only tangentially a scientific one.

 

[rightwinger]

This is where you provide a link supporting your assertion.

Based on the evidence I've seen there is little doubt in my mind that being gay is not a conscious choice and they are born that way.

Could be, doesn't matter to me one way or the other. When someone insists on something very specific like the existence of a particular gene accounting for the 'condition,' it is incumbent upon that person to provide support for such an assertion, that's all.

It would seem plausible, given how difficult - and perilous - it has been at certain points in history to be so oriented, that it is an aspect of a person's makeup that they cannot change. However, when you hear about 40 - 50 year-old men and women leaving their marriages because they suddenly came to the realization that they are gay, you have to wonder. Were they 'pretending' for 50 years? Were they somehow suppressing a gene all their lives? Is it a gene that didn't 'kick-in' for them until so late in life? It is at least fair to say there are many questions. Whatever the answers, it still holds that whether or how gays are accepted in society is a social matter and only tangentially a scientific one.

There is an awful societal pressure to pretend. Not as bad as it used to be, but still there
People can still be bisexual and decide on a preference late in life

 

[Unkotare]

Based on the evidence I've seen there is little doubt in my mind that being gay is not a conscious choice and they are born that way.

Could be, doesn't matter to me one way or the other. When someone insists on something very specific like the existence of a particular gene accounting for the 'condition,' it is incumbent upon that person to provide support for such an assertion, that's all.

It would seem plausible, given how difficult - and perilous - it has been at certain points in history to be so oriented, that it is an aspect of a person's makeup that they cannot change. However, when you hear about 40 - 50 year-old men and women leaving their marriages because they suddenly came to the realization that they are gay, you have to wonder. Were they 'pretending' for 50 years? Were they somehow suppressing a gene all their lives? Is it a gene that didn't 'kick-in' for them until so late in life? It is at least fair to say there are many questions. Whatever the answers, it still holds that whether or how gays are accepted in society is a social matter and only tangentially a scientific one.

There is an awful societal pressure to pretend. Not as bad as it used to be, but still there
People can still be bisexual and decide on a preference late in life

The plot thickens. Is there a gene for bisexuality as well?

 

[westwall]

Many of us Christians are not Catholic. There are many types of Christians, and I don't agree with most of what the Pope or the Catholic doctrine teaches. I never heard anything about this "wiring" thing in the brain. I had heard that if gays were born that way then there would be something found in their DNA....which hasn't been found yet. Once they come up with proof that they are born with a gay gene, or whatever, then I may believe it. I still have no hate for them....but I have a problem believing someone is born that way. After so many years in this debate I would think someone smart out there would have found something.

Explain that to all the gays who have been murdered in Africa. It is not a choice. .

The fact that people have been killed has no logical relation to whether a 'gay gene' exists or not.

Actually yes it does. The consequences for being gay in Africa, and for that matter much of the world, are so severe that no one would willingly engage in that behavior if they had a choice. Tortured to death is not my idea of fun. If you're lucky they will merely hang you.

 

[westwall]

This is where you provide a link supporting your assertion.

Based on the evidence I've seen there is little doubt in my mind that being gay is not a conscious choice and they are born that way.

Could be, doesn't matter to me one way or the other. When someone insists on something very specific like the existence of a particular gene accounting for the 'condition,' it is incumbent upon that person to provide support for such an assertion, that's all.

It would seem plausible, given how difficult - and perilous - it has been at certain points in history to be so oriented, that it is an aspect of a person's makeup that they cannot change. However, when you hear about 40 - 50 year-old men and women leaving their marriages because they suddenly came to the realization that they are gay, you have to wonder. Were they 'pretending' for 50 years? Were they somehow suppressing a gene all their lives? Is it a gene that didn't 'kick-in' for them until so late in life? It is at least fair to say there are many questions. Whatever the answers, it still holds that whether or how gays are accepted in society is a social matter and only tangentially a scientific one.

Yes, they were pretending. They were conforming to society and society's norms. Now that the stigma is not nearly so great they are finally coming out and living in their own skin.

 

[Unkotare]

Explain that to all the gays who have been murdered in Africa. It is not a choice. .

The fact that people have been killed has no logical relation to whether a 'gay gene' exists or not.

Actually yes it does. .

Actually it really, really doesn't. There is no necessary logical connection between the two propositions. People do things that carry dire consequences all the time. Are they all prisoners of genetic destiny?

 

[westwall]

Could be, doesn't matter to me one way or the other. When someone insists on something very specific like the existence of a particular gene accounting for the 'condition,' it is incumbent upon that person to provide support for such an assertion, that's all.

It would seem plausible, given how difficult - and perilous - it has been at certain points in history to be so oriented, that it is an aspect of a person's makeup that they cannot change. However, when you hear about 40 - 50 year-old men and women leaving their marriages because they suddenly came to the realization that they are gay, you have to wonder. Were they 'pretending' for 50 years? Were they somehow suppressing a gene all their lives? Is it a gene that didn't 'kick-in' for them until so late in life? It is at least fair to say there are many questions. Whatever the answers, it still holds that whether or how gays are accepted in society is a social matter and only tangentially a scientific one.

There is an awful societal pressure to pretend. Not as bad as it used to be, but still there
People can still be bisexual and decide on a preference late in life

The plot thickens. Is there a gene for bisexuality as well?

Almost certainly. A persons genetic makeup is responsible for pretty much all aspects of their lives. Environment certainly has an effect. A smart person, through bad diet, can be made average or worse. But sexuality is so fundamentally ingrained in our very being that whatever sexual preference you have you were born with.

It's called instinct. All animals have them. Liberals are trying to beat them out of people (and failing spectacularly) but man is an animal. He or she is driven and controlled by basic desires that most can't control.

The people who have been able to control themselves to not drink or smoke or do any sort of bad behavior are exceedingly rare.

 

[Unkotare]

Based on the evidence I've seen there is little doubt in my mind that being gay is not a conscious choice and they are born that way.

Could be, doesn't matter to me one way or the other. When someone insists on something very specific like the existence of a particular gene accounting for the 'condition,' it is incumbent upon that person to provide support for such an assertion, that's all.

It would seem plausible, given how difficult - and perilous - it has been at certain points in history to be so oriented, that it is an aspect of a person's makeup that they cannot change. However, when you hear about 40 - 50 year-old men and women leaving their marriages because they suddenly came to the realization that they are gay, you have to wonder. Were they 'pretending' for 50 years? Were they somehow suppressing a gene all their lives? Is it a gene that didn't 'kick-in' for them until so late in life? It is at least fair to say there are many questions. Whatever the answers, it still holds that whether or how gays are accepted in society is a social matter and only tangentially a scientific one.

Yes, they were pretending. .

You know that to be the case for every single member of what must be a reasonably large group of people, at least nearly all of whom you don't know personally? You have unimpeachable insight into their inner thoughts and feelings? I can understand if you feel strongly about this topic, but try to adhere to at least a basic level of logical consistency.

 

[Unkotare]

There is an awful societal pressure to pretend. Not as bad as it used to be, but still there
People can still be bisexual and decide on a preference late in life

The plot thickens. Is there a gene for bisexuality as well?

Almost certainly. .

Then you almost certainly have a link to share regarding the proof of this?

 

[westwall]

The fact that people have been killed has no logical relation to whether a 'gay gene' exists or not.

Actually yes it does. .

Actually it really, really doesn't. There is no necessary logical connection between the two propositions. People do things that carry dire consequences all the time. Are they all prisoners of genetic destiny?

Yes, for the most part they are. Healthy people who exercise daily, eat a nutty twiggy diet and never drink anything but water regularly die at an early age from massive heart attacks. Most people who smoke are going to get lung cancer or emphysema thanks to genetic markers that make them susceptible to the carcinogens involved.
Pedophiles have a 100% recidivism rate, they cannot be controlled no matter how hard you try to. Even castration won't work. It's in their genes, which is sad because for the most part they can be very productive members of society but they must never, ever be allowed around children.

 

[westwall]

The plot thickens. Is there a gene for bisexuality as well?

Almost certainly. .

Then you almost certainly have a link to share regarding the proof of this?

No, I don't, but I am a scientist and I have observed the world around me for a very long time and no matter how much you paid me, and no matter how cute the guy was, I could never have sex with one. Period. Some could, I simply couldn't.

 

[Unkotare]

Actually yes it does. .

Actually it really, really doesn't. There is no necessary logical connection between the two propositions. People do things that carry dire consequences all the time. Are they all prisoners of genetic destiny?

Yes, for the most part they are. .

You know this for every human behavior that can possibly carry negative consequences? Come on now, keep yourself grounded.


Or are you perhaps suggesting that free will does not exist at all? If so, then no one should be imprisoned for any crime. It's not their fault. They should be 'sentenced' to gene therapy and society will become perfect. Is that it? In fact, scientists should be working day and night to isolate every gene associated with every unwanted behavior and all children should be 'corrected' at birth to render them incapable of committing crimes or engaging in behavior that has been deemed unacceptable, right?

All of which brings me back to my original question.

 

[Unkotare]

Almost certainly. .

Then you almost certainly have a link to share regarding the proof of this?

No, I don't, but I am a scientist and .....

Wait a minute. You're a scientist and you cannot provide a link to something - a matter of science, mind you - that you insist is indisputably true? You don't sound like a scientist, to be honest.

 

[Sunni Man]

I would never invite a homo into my home.

But since I don't know any.

The point is moot. ..

 

[Unkotare]

I would never invite a homo into my home.

But since I don't know any.

The point is moot. ..

Would you appreciate the same sentiment, slur included and all, if someone felt the same way about Muslims?

 

[Sunni Man]

I would never invite a homo into my home.

But since I don't know any.

The point is moot. ..

Would you appreciate the same sentiment, slur included and all, if someone felt the same way about Muslims?

Actually, in todays environment a homo would be welcomed and not a muslim into most peoples homes.

But to answer your question; It wouldn't bother me at all. ..

 

[Unkotare]

I would never invite a homo into my home.

But since I don't know any.

The point is moot. ..

Would you appreciate the same sentiment, slur included and all, if someone felt the same way about Muslims?

Actually, in todays environment a homo would be welcomed and not a muslim into most peoples homes.

But to answer your question; It wouldn't bother me at all. ..

So you think anti-Islamic bigotry is just fine? You wouldn't prefer that there not be such bigotry?

 

[Sunni Man]

So you think anti-Islamic bigotry is just fine? You wouldn't prefer that there not be such bigotry?

I am a realist, and it is what it is.........but I don't loose any sleep over it.

True story...........

 

[Unkotare]

So you think anti-Islamic bigotry is just fine? You wouldn't prefer that there not be such bigotry?

I am a realist, and it is what it is.........but I don't loose any sleep over it.

True story...........

You didn't really answer my question.

 

[westwall]

Then you almost certainly have a link to share regarding the proof of this?

No, I don't, but I am a scientist and .....

Wait a minute. You're a scientist and you cannot provide a link to something - a matter of science, mind you - that you insist is indisputably true? You don't sound like a scientist, to be honest.

I don't have a link for it because I've never bothered to look. I gave you my opinion based on decades of observation. If you wish to parse words feel free.