I Was Right All Along! Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay or Transgender

[SassyIrishLass]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken!

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

If an identical twin is gay, why is their twin also gay in 40% of the cases....not to be seen with fraternal twins or other siblings?

Do you not realize you defeated your own argument?

If you're "born" gay, then identical twins should match 100% - including sexual orientation. They are literally exact copies of eachother, DNA and all.

The fact that they are not proves it's a learned behavior.

Bingo!!!#

 

[mdk]

Did I say you did, Marty? Nope. I sure didn't.

See, that's what happens when you don't reference people or quote them directly, assumptions are made.

This isn't a NJ rest area, where you can glory hole your way though without actually having to pick and choose an actual person.

Or you could just not make assumptions and jump to conclusions. Crazy, I know.

Nah, just another chance to get my nuanced viewpoint across.

The thing is, I agree with you’re legal reasoning 100% concerning Obergefell. I feel that would been the better ruling for Loving as well, but that wasn’t the way it was decided.

To me loving and Obergfell are not related. There has always been inter-racial/tribal/clan marriage going back to antiquity. The Miscegenation laws were a response that limited something that was previously accepted, even if not by all countries or groups.

SSM as a LEGAL concept is really only something we have come up with in the past few decades. For something new, the legislative process was the way to go, not the courts.

The other option would be for gay people to come up with their own contract and name, call it "Blarrige" or something like that.

I disagree and I think the aforementioned legal ruling should have been applied the same in both cases. You don't and that's cool. At the end of the day, queers can marry queers and honkies can marry darkies.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Which God/ Whose God?

Your beliefs are cool..for you...however---part of what makes this country great..IMO--is that you do not get to foist them off on me.

Well go suck some junk and hope for the best

Now..I'll leave the junk sucking to you..Sassy Lassy--Assuming you can find someone so very foolish..and/or drunk.

Times are against your point of view..the whole 'gay' thing is losing relevance as the younger folks recognize it for the non-issue that it is.

Married 16 years this July to a great husband and father.

You have failed yet again....fag

Which still begs the question..how many 'crimes against nature' have YOU committed?

Unless I demand you accept them it's none of your concern....Twinkie

Actually you'd be wise to take along look in a mirror....then STFU

Twinkie? You repping for Hostess now?

Looked in mirror...no epiphanies. Oh wait!! Yes...definitely need a haircut.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Well go suck some junk and hope for the best

Now..I'll leave the junk sucking to you..Sassy Lassy--Assuming you can find someone so very foolish..and/or drunk.

Times are against your point of view..the whole 'gay' thing is losing relevance as the younger folks recognize it for the non-issue that it is.

Married 16 years this July to a great husband and father.

You have failed yet again....fag

Which still begs the question..how many 'crimes against nature' have YOU committed?

Unless I demand you accept them it's none of your concern....Twinkie

Actually you'd be wise to take along look in a mirror....then STFU

Twinkie? You repping for Hostess now?

Looked in mirror...no epiphanies. Oh wait!! Yes...definitely need a haircut.

When the argument is lost idiots post Twinkie pics.

Get lost

 

[martybegan]

See, that's what happens when you don't reference people or quote them directly, assumptions are made.

This isn't a NJ rest area, where you can glory hole your way though without actually having to pick and choose an actual person.

Or you could just not make assumptions and jump to conclusions. Crazy, I know.

Nah, just another chance to get my nuanced viewpoint across.

The thing is, I agree with you’re legal reasoning 100% concerning Obergefell. I feel that would been the better ruling for Loving as well, but that wasn’t the way it was decided.

To me loving and Obergfell are not related. There has always been inter-racial/tribal/clan marriage going back to antiquity. The Miscegenation laws were a response that limited something that was previously accepted, even if not by all countries or groups.

SSM as a LEGAL concept is really only something we have come up with in the past few decades. For something new, the legislative process was the way to go, not the courts.

The other option would be for gay people to come up with their own contract and name, call it "Blarrige" or something like that.

I disagree and I think the aforementioned legal ruling should have been applied the same in both cases. You don't and that's cool. At the end of the day, queers can marry queers and honkies can marry darkies.

The real fun is going to be when a State legalizes plural marriage.

 

[Nosmo King]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken! Now President Trump should sign an executive order making it mandatory for gays to have conversion therapy so they can return to normal and find God.

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

Why is this issue so important to you?

Well, it's kinda been a political issue for at least the last 10 years....there's that.

But only in the intent to repress other people. Why is that so prevalent a,one the Right?

 

[mdk]

Or you could just not make assumptions and jump to conclusions. Crazy, I know.

Nah, just another chance to get my nuanced viewpoint across.

The thing is, I agree with you’re legal reasoning 100% concerning Obergefell. I feel that would been the better ruling for Loving as well, but that wasn’t the way it was decided.

To me loving and Obergfell are not related. There has always been inter-racial/tribal/clan marriage going back to antiquity. The Miscegenation laws were a response that limited something that was previously accepted, even if not by all countries or groups.

SSM as a LEGAL concept is really only something we have come up with in the past few decades. For something new, the legislative process was the way to go, not the courts.

The other option would be for gay people to come up with their own contract and name, call it "Blarrige" or something like that.

I disagree and I think the aforementioned legal ruling should have been applied the same in both cases. You don't and that's cool. At the end of the day, queers can marry queers and honkies can marry darkies.

The real fun is going to be when a State legalizes plural marriage.

 

[Rocko]

Whether people are born gay or something happens to them early in their life that causes them to be gay is irrelevant. The fact is there are people that are gay, and as for now, nothing can be done about that.

 

[Crixus]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken! Now President Trump should sign an executive order making it mandatory for gays to have conversion therapy so they can return to normal and find God.

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

Na, my boss is queer as fuck and has two strong kids and 6 grand kids. Don’t know if they are fags yet, but they act like normal kids.

 

[Olde Europe]

Well the gay couple are, and technically the baker is as well. On one hand the gay couple has to do extra work and probably had their feelings hurt.

On the other forcing the baker to bake the cake is making them choose between their livelihood and their morals.

Only one of these scenarios has a major life impact, i.e. the choice between your morals and your living.

One really has to marvel at that whiny dog shit of an argument.

The requirement to put two male figures on a wedding cake would make the baker choose "between their livelihood and their morals". And these two male figures on the cake would have a "major life impact".

The mendacity is just as breath-taking as the bigotry. What a hoax this all is. The requirement everyone be treated with equal respect, from lunch counters to wedding cakes, is just too high a burden on their tiny egos. Thus they field the "religion of love" in order to discriminate, just as in the olden days, and they sure disfigure their beloved religion in the process, also as it was back then. The Christer bigots have no shame, and also not a shred of self-respect, and no reason for any.

 

[Crixus]

Nah, just another chance to get my nuanced viewpoint across.

The thing is, I agree with you’re legal reasoning 100% concerning Obergefell. I feel that would been the better ruling for Loving as well, but that wasn’t the way it was decided.

To me loving and Obergfell are not related. There has always been inter-racial/tribal/clan marriage going back to antiquity. The Miscegenation laws were a response that limited something that was previously accepted, even if not by all countries or groups.

SSM as a LEGAL concept is really only something we have come up with in the past few decades. For something new, the legislative process was the way to go, not the courts.

The other option would be for gay people to come up with their own contract and name, call it "Blarrige" or something like that.

I disagree and I think the aforementioned legal ruling should have been applied the same in both cases. You don't and that's cool. At the end of the day, queers can marry queers and honkies can marry darkies.

The real fun is going to be when a State legalizes plural marriage.

^ just BDSM from another angle.

 

[OldLady]

Wrong, he doesn't just disagree, the work violated his deeply held religious convictions. That's also in the Constitution and the gov't should not be able to FORCE you to do that, not even to do business.

I think the baker has an excellent chance with this Supreme Court.

See Employment Division,Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Employment Division v. Smith

All persons, no matter of what their beliefs are, must obey generally applicable laws.

Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind."
​

Justice Antonin Scalia

Your theory would create social chaos, with the adult population among 320+ people each going his or her own way, each guided only by a personal belief.

Personally, I don't want to see horse-drawn buggies on the beltway.

Because you are a progressive asshole who thinks everyone should live, think and act like you do.

You are the one how thinks that everyone should live, think, and act like you do. Your comments usually bespeak of wanting to impose your will on others, and cause chaos in the process. You don't seem to realize that not everyone chooses your lifestyle. You think only of yourself.

BTW: there is nothing wrong with being a "progressive." Progress is a good thing.

How is my will being imposed? The couple in the cake situation can still easily get a cake, they can still have a wedding. The baker on the other hand is faced with either going against their moral code or going out of business.

If I owned a bake shop I wouldn't decline gay weddings. My issue is you trying to force others to work against their will over a trivial matter.

Progress isn't by default a good thing, if you want an example try progressing over a cliff.

He wasn't "forced to work" or "forced to go out of business." All he needed to do was to pay the fine and correct his business practices to conform to the law. His business could not be lost by the lose of one cake order. If he lost business, it seems like other people decided not to patronize him.

Rather than make wedding cakes for gay people, he stopped making them at all, and this lost him 40% of his business. Whether it was all because of giving up the wedding cake business, which is pretty lucrative, or if people began to boycott his store, he says he lost 40% of his business.

 

[Lysistrata]

The baker wasn't "punished," the gay couple were. The baker punished them for their beliefs by refusing to do business with them because he personally does not agree with their lifestyle.
Well la dee dah. No one cares what your personal opinion is when you are doing business with the public. In this country, we're EQUAL.
I feel bad for him, because he has been consistent in his beliefs for years and it isn't just gay cakes he won't make. But I don't see another solution but stepping in and forcing him to follow the rules of equality.

Wrong, he doesn't just disagree, the work violated his deeply held religious convictions. That's also in the Constitution and the gov't should not be able to FORCE you to do that, not even to do business.

I think the baker has an excellent chance with this Supreme Court.

See Employment Division,Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Employment Division v. Smith

All persons, no matter of what their beliefs are, must obey generally applicable laws.

Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind."
​

Justice Antonin Scalia

Your theory would create social chaos, with the adult population among 320+ people each going his or her own way, each guided only by a personal belief.

Personally, I don't want to see horse-drawn buggies on the beltway.

lol
Ok, How about people have the decency not to try and force their views on other people through business? Why force someone to To do something they obviously object to? But then again you are a control freak... It’s a control freak thing I do not understand

"Decency" has nothing to do with it. Nobody tried to force any view on anyone. He has/had a business license. He had quite an elaborate website. Even on it, he did not indicate that the service that he was offering was restricted to certain members of the public. It was a general invitation to patronize his business. He did not do anything at all to warn the public of his religious proclivities. All that happened was that his violation of anti-discrimination laws was reported through the established procedure.

The couple did nothing wrong, and they are blameless in this matter. I notice that the anti-LGBT types always try to flip the blame onto LGBTs, which is BS. This guy failed in his responsibilities.

Again, just because you sell something doesn't mean you lose your Right to Free Exercise.

Sorry, but just going to another baker is the right move here, unless you have an axe to grind.

We know YOU have an axe to grind, a tiny, little useless axe to grind.

The "go another baker" thing doesn't fly. It puts the onus on the customer when it is the proprietor whose decision it was and who is totally responsible. It is not the responsibility of discrimination victims to go off quietly with their tails tucked between their legs.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken! Now President Trump should sign an executive order making it mandatory for gays to have conversion therapy so they can return to normal and find God.

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

Na, my boss is queer as fuck and has two strong kids and 6 grand kids. Don’t know if they are fags yet, but they act like normal kids.

Two kids and six grandkids betrays "queer as F"

Jus sayin

 

[WEATHER53]

The primiere medical institution in the world has rendered its observations after thorough research.
Being that it does not fit the bizzaro world feelings of the liberals, JH is homophonic trash and always has been.

 

[Crixus]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken! Now President Trump should sign an executive order making it mandatory for gays to have conversion therapy so they can return to normal and find God.

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

Na, my boss is queer as fuck and has two strong kids and 6 grand kids. Don’t know if they are fags yet, but they act like normal kids.

Two kids and six grandkids betrays "queer as F"

Jus sayin

Na, they are all great kids.

 

[bodecea]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

Tears, not fear. It would be terribly funny if someone actually feared queers getting married.

No tears here. Be "married", be happy and content. It's your life...but I know how it ends

50% + divorce?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken! Now President Trump should sign an executive order making it mandatory for gays to have conversion therapy so they can return to normal and find God.

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

Na, my boss is queer as fuck and has two strong kids and 6 grand kids. Don’t know if they are fags yet, but they act like normal kids.

Two kids and six grandkids betrays "queer as F"

Jus sayin

Na, they are all great kids.

Uhm if he's gay as eff and has kids?

Think

 

[bodecea]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

When have I complained about them getting married?

My argument has always been about free exercise in the case of the whole cake thing, and the fact that Obergfell is terrible SC precedent.

Obergfell should have allowed the rednecks to continue to not issue SSM licenses, but to accept licenses from out of State under full faith and credit.

I was happy when NY passed SSM legislatively, that was the right way to do it.

Did I say you did, Marty? Nope. I sure didn't.

See, that's what happens when you don't reference people or quote them directly, assumptions are made.

This isn't a NJ rest area, where you can glory hole your way though without actually having to pick and choose an actual person.

It is always fascinating how CRC type arguments having anything to do with gay people always ends up boiling down to talking about the gay sex act......waaaaaaay more than any gay people talk about it.

 

[bodecea]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

Tears, not fear. It would be terribly funny if someone actually feared queers getting married.

No tears here. Be "married", be happy and content. It's your life...but I know how it ends

I was married long before it become legal, but I know how it ends too...in Halls of Valhalla.

Lol..no. God is pretty clear on this

No...just people who think they talk for the gods.