Gays blaming blacks for gay marriage ban in California

[ABikerSailor]

ABikerSailor, homos don't reproduce (except mud babies)

If there was a homo gene

Homos carrying this gene would have gone extinct a long time ago

Did you read ANYTHING that Mac had posted? Obviously not, otherwise you would not have made such a bigoted, arrogantly STUPID comment.

I won't go into it further Sucking Moron The Rapist. You're too stupid to recognize your own ignorance.

 

[Macintosh]

ABikerSailor, homos don't reproduce (except mud babies)

If there was a homo gene

Homos carrying this gene would have gone extinct a long time ago

I see you have no concept of genetics.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Being left handed is a genetic predisposition that a person has no control over.

Homosexuality is a choice.

Yet another high flying stupid comment.

Do your parents know you're playing on the computer?

 

[Sunni Man]

I see you have no concept of genetics.

So you are saying that genetics plays No part in the evolutionary process?

 

[WhiteLion]

Think about it.

If there was a homo gene.

Then there would be NO homos!!

Because through evolutionary process. And not reproducing.

Homos would have gone extinct a long time ago!!

Believe me, I wish there was a homo gene

True , same goes for evolution theorist back when they were claiming mankind descended from apes, something called co-existance they realized how dumb it looked, in that if man did descend from apes there would be no apes today, it was paradoxal to say the least. So evolutionist came up with branching which is normal creationism process in the first place (DOH?)...

 

[xsited1]

Now, you ignoramus, are you going to tell me that the Royal College succumbed to pressure, too? How about the World Health Organization? Did they?



You rely on absolutely nothing. You do no research at all, because had you done any, you might not have to be talked to as if you were a child.

For others who are interested, there is much pure research to peruse and just as much biased research. Here's a great place to start:

Is There a "Gay Gene"?

There is no help for you, Macintosh. You are stuck in believing only what you want to believe.

 

[Macintosh]

So you are saying that genetics plays No part in the evolutionary process?

Not what I said at all. I was responding to your asinine remark that if homosexuality was genetic there would be no homosexuals. That's a fucked up conclusion on several different levels.

 

[Macintosh]

For others who are interested, there is much pure research to peruse and just as much biased research. Here's a great place to start:

Is There a "Gay Gene"?

There is no help for you, Macintosh. You are stuck in believing only what you want to believe.

LOL. I told you the bigots would begin providing NARTH links. It's a group comprised of Christians who fancy themselves as freethinking psychologists. They are not credible. Their claims have been refuted time and again.

 

[glockmail]

....

And prove the APA has been "forced to swallow the homosexual agenda." Then, please, explain what the "homosexual agenda" is.

I've already show you that, and you chose to ignore the truth as usual. The gay agenda is to propagate their numbers, since they can't do it naturally.

 

[Macintosh]

I've already show you that, and you chose to ignore the truth as usual. The gay agenda is to propagate their numbers, since they can't do it naturally.

O.K., sickandtiredofliblies (I know it's you from PF, BTW. I liked you over there, but here...I don't know), then you must believe the Royal College and the WHO were influenced by the gay agenda, right?

And if so, succumbing to the pressure of a small group of people - homosexuals - would deliver what benefits?

 

[Sunni Man]

Not what I said at all. I was responding to your asinine remark that if homosexuality was genetic there would be no homosexuals. That's a fucked up conclusion on several different levels.

Any species that doesn't reproduce goes extinct. Period

 

[Macintosh]

Any species that doesn't reproduce goes extinct. Period

Wow, you're ignorant.

 

[glockmail]

O.K., sickandtiredofliblies, (I know it's you from PF, BTW. I liked you over there, but here...I don't know), then you must believe the Royal College and the WHO were influenced by the gay agenda, right?

And if so, succumbing to the pressure of a small group of people - homosexuals - would deliver what benefits?

You're obviously delirious about this other poster that you admire.

Liberal organizations support the gay agenda because they have a common goal to denigrate and tear down society.

 

[Sunni Man]

Wow, you're ignorant.

A well thought out and scientific response to back up your position

 

[Sunni Man]

The gay agenda is to propagate their numbers, since they can't do it naturally.

That's why the radical homo agenda targets children to be indoctrinated and recruited into the preverted sodomite lifestyle.

 

[Macintosh]

You're obviously delirious about this other poster that you admire.

It's you. The other dude always said liberals were liars and lauded Clint Eastwood. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool me at all.

Liberal organizations support the gay agenda because they have a common goal to denigrate and tear down society.

LOL. Yeah, that makes perfect sense.

 

[glockmail]

That's why the radical homo agenda targets children to be indoctrinated and recruited into the preverted sodomite lifestyle.

Not even radicals. I know a gal who, along with her "wife", adopted two kids and they go to my Catholic church.

 

[glockmail]

It's you. The other dude always said liberals were liars and lauded Clint Eastwood. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool me at all......

Oh this is going to be great. Now you have to prove your accusation. Submit evidence, or lose credibility.

 

[Sunni Man]

Not even radicals. I know a gal who, along with her "wife", adopted two kids and they go to my Catholic church.

That's so sad.........

Allowing children to be adopted by homos is a terrible form of child abuse

 

[Macintosh]

A well thought out and scientific response to back up your position

I find it terribly difficult to believe that you're a psychologist. Typically, psychologists stay up to date on scientific research that seeks to answer questions.

They've come up with an explanation for why male homosexuals do not go extinct, but they are still working on females.

Homosexuality in males may be caused in part by genes that can increase fertility in females, according to a new study.

The findings may help solve the puzzle of why, if homosexuality is hereditary, it hasn't already disappeared from the gene pool, since gay people are less likely to reproduce than heterosexuals.

A team of researchers found that some female relatives of gay men tend to have more children than average. The scientists used a computer model to explain how two genes passed on through the maternal line could produce this effect.

In 2004 the researchers studied about 200 Italian families and found that the mothers, maternal aunts and maternal grandmothers of gay men are more fecund, or fruitful, than average. Recently, they tried to explain their findings with a number of genetic models, and found one that fit the bill.

"This is the first time that a model fits all our empirical data," said Andrea Camperio-Ciani, an evolutionary psychologist at the University of Padova in Italy who led the study. "These genes work in a sexually antagonistic way — that means that when they're represented in a female, they increase fecundity , and when they're represented in a male, they decrease fecundity. It's a trait that benefits one sex at the cost of the other."​

And to amplify a point I made earlier:

"I think it's almost beyond a doubt that genes have some influence," said Ray Blanchard, a researcher at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, who studies the effect of birth order in predicting whether a male will be born homosexual. "My personal view is that there is probably more than one biological mechanism contributing toward homosexuality. I think it's also safe to say that there is at least one non-genetic influence."​

And to address the validity of the Italian model:

Eric Vilain, a professor of human genetics at the University of California, Los Angeles, has studied possible biological factors influencing homosexuality. He said the system studied by the Italian team seems plausible, but that it's too soon to be convinced.​

And also:

Research by Paul Vasey, a psychologist at the University of Lethbridge in Canada, and his graduate student, Doug VanderLaan, provides preliminary support for the Italian team's results. The scientists studied homosexual men in Independent Samoa, known locally as fa'afafine ("in the manner of a woman"). They found that the mothers of fa'afafine produce more offspring than the mothers of heterosexual men in that society.​

And finally:

"I think this is an example where the results of scientific research can have important social implications," Camperio-Ciani said. "You have all this antagonism against homosexuality because they say it's against nature because it doesn't lead to reproduction. We found out this is not true because homosexuality is just one of the consequences of strategies for making females more fecund."​

Why Gays Don't Go Extinct | LiveScience

There are many, many unanswered questions. However, I believe I have provided ample evidence for my contention: Homosexuality is not a choice, nor a mental disorder. It is a combination of nature and nurture.

That, X, is research. I do quite a bit of it before drawing conclusions. You do not. You champion ideology rather than common sense. I do not, for if I did, I would not be a Republican in support of gay rights.