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

[Polishprince]

A man being attracted to another man to the point of wanting to have sex with him is NOT a normal attraction. Does it happen? Yes!! But it ain't normal or typical.

Dear Leo123
I'd say you have the right as an individual to believe as you do.
But nobody on either side, with either beliefs that homosexuality is natural unnatural or could be either way,
has the right to abuse GOVT to impose a bias in policy either one way or the other.

That's fine to have your own beliefs, which I believe govt and public policy should respect and not punish.
(as in the cases of bakers and florists being penalized and sued for refusing to provide services for same sex weddings.)

However, when these beliefs THREATEN discrimination against people of
LGBT beliefs, orientation and identity, THAT's what's causing this backlash
and going too far by wanting to recognize LGBT as a protected class.

What I believe will help stop this threat of infringement and discrimination
is AGREEING to recognize and respect BELIEFS of both sides
and AGREE NOT TO PUSH BIASED AGENDA THROUGH GOVT.

As long as we agree to quit pushing beliefs into Govt and Public Policy,
whatever we want to believe or reject as individuals is within our rights and freedoms.

Just not pushing this into public policy where it violates the beliefs of others!

Sex is not a belief it is a fact. What you call yourself is a belief. A hetero does not have to believe they are sexually something they are not. Much healthier. Radical, activist homosexuals have tried to push their beliefs onto the public via government schools and courts in order to pressure society into acceptance that they are sexually normal.

Radical, activist HETEROSEXUALS have tried to push their beliefs onto the public via government schools and courts in order to pressure society into acceptance that they are sexually normal for a long time now, Homosexuals trying to claim normalcy is just an attempt to achieve a balance in society.

Actually, that's bullshit. Until the past 20 years, virtually no one- gay or normative- was in favor of Gay Marriage.

James I of England and IV of Scotland was a flaming and proud homosexual and the absolute monarch of all of Great Britain. Further, he was undisputed leader of the established church- the Brits having separated from Catholic Church.

Yet, in spite of that- and you can check out the historical record- King James never legalized Gay Marriage or Sodomy for his subjects even though it was his right to do it, and no one could tell him otherwise.

 

[bodecea]

A man being attracted to another man to the point of wanting to have sex with him is NOT a normal attraction. Does it happen? Yes!! But it ain't normal or typical.

Dear Leo123
I'd say you have the right as an individual to believe as you do.
But nobody on either side, with either beliefs that homosexuality is natural unnatural or could be either way,
has the right to abuse GOVT to impose a bias in policy either one way or the other.

That's fine to have your own beliefs, which I believe govt and public policy should respect and not punish.
(as in the cases of bakers and florists being penalized and sued for refusing to provide services for same sex weddings.)

However, when these beliefs THREATEN discrimination against people of
LGBT beliefs, orientation and identity, THAT's what's causing this backlash
and going too far by wanting to recognize LGBT as a protected class.

What I believe will help stop this threat of infringement and discrimination
is AGREEING to recognize and respect BELIEFS of both sides
and AGREE NOT TO PUSH BIASED AGENDA THROUGH GOVT.

As long as we agree to quit pushing beliefs into Govt and Public Policy,
whatever we want to believe or reject as individuals is within our rights and freedoms.

Just not pushing this into public policy where it violates the beliefs of others!

Sex is not a belief it is a fact. What you call yourself is a belief. A hetero does not have to believe they are sexually something they are not. Much healthier. Radical, activist homosexuals have tried to push their beliefs onto the public via government schools and courts in order to pressure society into acceptance that they are sexually normal.

Radical, activist HETEROSEXUALS have tried to push their beliefs onto the public via government schools and courts in order to pressure society into acceptance that they are sexually normal for a long time now, Homosexuals trying to claim normalcy is just an attempt to achieve a balance in society.

Actually, that's bullshit. Until the past 20 years, virtually no one- gay or normative- was in favor of Gay Marriage.

James I of England and IV of Scotland was a flaming and proud homosexual and the absolute monarch of all of Great Britain. Further, he was undisputed leader of the established church- the Brits having separated from Catholic Church.

Yet, in spite of that- and you can check out the historical record- King James never legalized Gay Marriage or Sodomy for his subjects even though it was his right to do it, and no one could tell him otherwise.

So we evolve. Until the past 40 years, virtually no one was in favor of inter-racial marriage. And some still get grief for inter-faith marriages.

 

[Leo123]

So we evolve. Until the past 40 years, virtually no one was in favor of inter-racial marriage. And some still get grief for inter-faith marriages.

Evolution requires procreation doesn't it? How can homosexuals evolve?

 

[Lysistrata]

In the end, this discussion is irrelevant. If you are heterosexual, live heterosexual. If you are LGBTQ, live LGBTQ. Who cares what the neighbors do? Frankly, I have to side with the LGBTQs on this, as they have not interfered with anything heterosexuals do, and it has been the heterosexuals (not all of us, please!), who want to interfere with the personal decisions of LGBTQs. There is no reasonable point to this interference.

Again, homosexuality is not a prevalent condition. That makes a homosexual person an outlier. Outliers are typically marginalized in any natural group of living animals. Humans are no exception. It's how the outlier handles their particular aberration that matters (excepting being physically attacked). Trying to deny nature and science is a sure loser.

But exactly what is the importance of this to you personally? Don't you have your own life to live? What is the connection between what LGBTQs do and your own life? Haven't you gotten what you wanted in your heterosexual existence? Why would it make you feel better if there were no LGBTQ people?

You missed my point because you wished to miss it I guess. I am not against LGBTQ I couldn't care less really. The discussion is about whether or not it should be considered the same as heterosexuality.....it is not. Because of nature and science. Homosexuality is not a typical human sexual choice. It doesn't mean those folks are any less human than anyone else. They are just different. Can we at least agree on that?

There is no reason to get everyone to be "normative" (I guess that is the buzzword these days). There simply is no connection between what you, or I am attracted to, and what others are attracted to. Why is there this competitive stance?

 

[Leo123]

There is no reason to get everyone to be "normative" (I guess that is the buzzword these days). There simply is no connection between what you, or I am attracted to, and what others are attracted to. Why is there this competitive stance?

No! No! I am not trying to get everyone 'normative.' All I am saying is that if something is not normal, maybe that should be acknowledged instead of trying to make homosexuality 'normative.' It's not bad, it's not horrible, but it's not normal. Especially if one considers that the overwhelming evidence is in favor of heterosexuality. Our very existence and society is based on male/female partnership and procreation is it not?

 

[Lysistrata]

There is no reason to get everyone to be "normative" (I guess that is the buzzword these days). There simply is no connection between what you, or I am attracted to, and what others are attracted to. Why is there this competitive stance?

No! No! I am not trying to get everyone 'normative.' All I am saying is that if something is not normal, maybe that should be acknowledged instead of trying to make homosexuality 'normative.' It's not bad, it's not horrible, but it's not normal. Especially if one considers that the overwhelming evidence is in favor of heterosexuality. Our very existence and society is based on male/female partnership and procreation is it not?

But what is the point of what you are saying? What is the necessity of declaring something "normative" or not? Heterosexuals seem to be doing quite well with the procreation stuff. Apparently, too well. What impact does it have that some folks don't join in? What's the connection? Not enough pregnant couples out there for you?

Remember that there are many heterosexual folks who don't want to procreate, don't want to procreate at this moment in time, or don't want to procreate any more than they already have. They are the ones who need birth control.

I might add that sexual relations, regardless of heterosexual or homosexual, are often based on the emotional feelings between the partners. People do not have sex only to procreate. Their motivations hover somewhere, depending on the couple, from love to lust to drunkenness, and sometimes to an assertion of sexual dominance.

 

[lantern2814]

You're still an utter coward.

Nothing but name calling now? Not even any kind of rebuttal?

No, the no rebuttal is you and your made up words and phrases you use because you think they make you look smart (news flash, they don't). You continue to cry about the baker, but he has won twice already and you just keep harassing him. Maybe you better learn something. Intentionally targeting a particular business to attempt to bankrupt them is harassment. Religious objections are valid no matter how much you cry. It is not discrimination. When the baker wins again, he should sue those two into bankruptcy.

"your made up words and phrases you use because you think they make you look smart"

Hmmmm...where to start.

1. Words and phrases make up written communication, dear.

2. Newsflash, we know how CRCs (con-servative republican christians) hate smarts.

3. I heard your excuses all before...in the 60s...during Jim Crow.

Where to destroy you again.
1) Real words and phrases make up communication. Not your fake words and made up labels that apparently only you gays understand.
2)Since Sassy, Sue, I, and most other posters here are smarter than you, we know why you hate our side so much.
3) Since I never lived in the South, nor was I here during the Jim Crow era, your excuses are just that. Excuses. Thus they are dismissed.
That's 3 strikes. You're out.

Golly gee....posting to say how much smarter you are and how you've destroyed someone. Some very convincing stuff right there, dear boy.

Poor idiot. The irony is not realizing you did the exact same ting. Keep laughing. The baker still wins. By the way, noting the total avoidance of the facts thrown at you by multiple posters. Try again.

 

[WEATHER53]

Nothing but name calling now? Not even any kind of rebuttal?

No, the no rebuttal is you and your made up words and phrases you use because you think they make you look smart (news flash, they don't). You continue to cry about the baker, but he has won twice already and you just keep harassing him. Maybe you better learn something. Intentionally targeting a particular business to attempt to bankrupt them is harassment. Religious objections are valid no matter how much you cry. It is not discrimination. When the baker wins again, he should sue those two into bankruptcy.

"your made up words and phrases you use because you think they make you look smart"

Hmmmm...where to start.

1. Words and phrases make up written communication, dear.

2. Newsflash, we know how CRCs (con-servative republican christians) hate smarts.

3. I heard your excuses all before...in the 60s...during Jim Crow.

Where to destroy you again.
1) Real words and phrases make up communication. Not your fake words and made up labels that apparently only you gays understand.
2)Since Sassy, Sue, I, and most other posters here are smarter than you, we know why you hate our side so much.
3) Since I never lived in the South, nor was I here during the Jim Crow era, your excuses are just that. Excuses. Thus they are dismissed.
That's 3 strikes. You're out.

Golly gee....posting to say how much smarter you are and how you've destroyed someone. Some very convincing stuff right there, dear boy.

Poor idiot. The irony is not realizing you did the exact same ting. Keep laughing. The baker still wins. By the way, noting the total avoidance of the facts thrown at you by multiple posters. Try again.

Facts are racist
Feeling are fair
Lib 101

 

[bodecea]

Nothing but name calling now? Not even any kind of rebuttal?

No, the no rebuttal is you and your made up words and phrases you use because you think they make you look smart (news flash, they don't). You continue to cry about the baker, but he has won twice already and you just keep harassing him. Maybe you better learn something. Intentionally targeting a particular business to attempt to bankrupt them is harassment. Religious objections are valid no matter how much you cry. It is not discrimination. When the baker wins again, he should sue those two into bankruptcy.

"your made up words and phrases you use because you think they make you look smart"

Hmmmm...where to start.

1. Words and phrases make up written communication, dear.

2. Newsflash, we know how CRCs (con-servative republican christians) hate smarts.

3. I heard your excuses all before...in the 60s...during Jim Crow.

Where to destroy you again.
1) Real words and phrases make up communication. Not your fake words and made up labels that apparently only you gays understand.
2)Since Sassy, Sue, I, and most other posters here are smarter than you, we know why you hate our side so much.
3) Since I never lived in the South, nor was I here during the Jim Crow era, your excuses are just that. Excuses. Thus they are dismissed.
That's 3 strikes. You're out.

Golly gee....posting to say how much smarter you are and how you've destroyed someone. Some very convincing stuff right there, dear boy.

Poor idiot. The irony is not realizing you did the exact same ting. Keep laughing. The baker still wins. By the way, noting the total avoidance of the facts thrown at you by multiple posters. Try again.

Ah...another post declaring victory.....perhaps a few more and you are well on your way to convincing someone.


Maybe.

 

[SomeDudeUDunno]

Anyone with a brain and an elementary understanding of biology knows nobody would be born a "transperson" or "gay". There's no reason for it as far as evolution would be concerned. If someone were born that way..it would be detrimental...like a mutation or heriditary disease.

 

[Polishprince]

Anyone with a brain and an elementary understanding of biology knows nobody would be born a "transperson" or "gay". There's no reason for it as far as evolution would be concerned. If someone were born that way..it would be detrimental...like a mutation or heriditary disease.

It certainly goes against Darwin's theory of evolution and national selection.

And it also goes against Creation Science, the alternative theory, which teaches that Almighty God created us all in His image.

If they had brought up the topic during the Clarence Darrow/ William Jennings Bryan debate,both sides would have agreed

 

[SomeDudeUDunno]

Anyone with a brain and an elementary understanding of biology knows nobody would be born a "transperson" or "gay". There's no reason for it as far as evolution would be concerned. If someone were born that way..it would be detrimental...like a mutation or heriditary disease.

It certainly goes against Darwin's theory of evolution and national selection.

And it also goes against Creation Science, the alternative theory, which teaches that Almighty God created us all in His image.

If they had brought up the topic during the Clarence Darrow/ William Jennings Bryan debate,both sides would have agreed

It's all around nonsense. I have decided I am fine with people modifying their bodies as they see fit though, as long as others are not expected to indulge in their delusions as well. And as long as the surgeons are not permitted to lie to their patients and tell them the "sex change" actually changes their sex.

As long as we have to live amongst this crap anyway...

 

[SomeDudeUDunno]

Free association is badly needed today.

 

[bodecea]

Anyone with a brain and an elementary understanding of biology knows nobody would be born a "transperson" or "gay". There's no reason for it as far as evolution would be concerned. If someone were born that way..it would be detrimental...like a mutation or heriditary disease.

It certainly goes against Darwin's theory of evolution and national selection.

And it also goes against Creation Science, the alternative theory, which teaches that Almighty God created us all in His image.

If they had brought up the topic during the Clarence Darrow/ William Jennings Bryan debate,both sides would have agreed

Explain the 400+ other species that show about 5% gay members..................

 

[Polishprince]

Anyone with a brain and an elementary understanding of biology knows nobody would be born a "transperson" or "gay". There's no reason for it as far as evolution would be concerned. If someone were born that way..it would be detrimental...like a mutation or heriditary disease.

It certainly goes against Darwin's theory of evolution and national selection.

And it also goes against Creation Science, the alternative theory, which teaches that Almighty God created us all in His image.

If they had brought up the topic during the Clarence Darrow/ William Jennings Bryan debate,both sides would have agreed

It's all around nonsense. I have decided I am fine with people modifying their bodies as they see fit though, as long as others are not expected to indulge in their delusions as well. And as long as the surgeons are not permitted to lie to their patients and tell them the "sex change" actually changes their sex.

As long as we have to live amongst this crap anyway...

I don't see where the taxpayers need to be paying for this kind of thing. I think people can pay their own way, its an elective surgery if you want to have a "gender reassignment" Maybe libs can set up a fund for indigents that want this.

You probably don't want to do it at home, like this couple not too far from me tried to.

Transsexual held in castration death

 

[SomeDudeUDunno]

Anyone with a brain and an elementary understanding of biology knows nobody would be born a "transperson" or "gay". There's no reason for it as far as evolution would be concerned. If someone were born that way..it would be detrimental...like a mutation or heriditary disease.

It certainly goes against Darwin's theory of evolution and national selection.

And it also goes against Creation Science, the alternative theory, which teaches that Almighty God created us all in His image.

If they had brought up the topic during the Clarence Darrow/ William Jennings Bryan debate,both sides would have agreed

Explain the 400+ other species that show about 5% gay members..................

Are you equating the lower animal's sexuality to human's much more complex sexuality? I never understood why pro-LGBT advocates say this stuff. Unless they are animal rights fanatics. Then it all makes sense...

 

[SomeDudeUDunno]

Anyone with a brain and an elementary understanding of biology knows nobody would be born a "transperson" or "gay". There's no reason for it as far as evolution would be concerned. If someone were born that way..it would be detrimental...like a mutation or heriditary disease.

It certainly goes against Darwin's theory of evolution and national selection.

And it also goes against Creation Science, the alternative theory, which teaches that Almighty God created us all in His image.

If they had brought up the topic during the Clarence Darrow/ William Jennings Bryan debate,both sides would have agreed

It's all around nonsense. I have decided I am fine with people modifying their bodies as they see fit though, as long as others are not expected to indulge in their delusions as well. And as long as the surgeons are not permitted to lie to their patients and tell them the "sex change" actually changes their sex.

As long as we have to live amongst this crap anyway...

I don't see where the taxpayers need to be paying for this kind of thing. I think people can pay their own way, its an elective surgery if you want to have a "gender reassignment" Maybe libs can set up a fund for indigents that want this.

You probably don't want to do it at home, like this couple not too far from me tried to.

Nobody besides the person involved and/or the people willing to foot the bill out of their own pocket should be obligated to pay for the surgery.

 

[SweetSue92]

We would get along much better if you would just drop the spiritual heal stuff and stick to the objective facts and science.

Gays folks are not in need of therapy or healing simply by virtue of the fact that they are gay. The healing is needed as the result of what society has done to them

People who "change " are often bisexual which is a fact that most here gloss over and refuse to acknowledge the difference between lifestyle and sexual orientation. Many other "change " as the result of shame and coercion, but they don't really change at all and often the long term results are disastrous. This is what facts look like

Objective fact: Humans are born either male or female there is no third gender. It's scientific!!! Can we 'get along' now?

No XXY or XYY? What about Jesus? XX but identified as a male.

Sure. Very objective about Christianity. Uh-huh

 

[SweetSue92]

The anti-LGBTQ people always push a fundie "Christian" take on this, like they are struggling to "save" the "immortal souls" of LGBTQs. But they do nothing to "save" themselves from all sorts of "sins" that will lead them to be dismissed by the Almighty. Do they honestly think, according to their own narrative, that somebody like trump is going to go to Heaven. How about these guys who have premarital sex and extramarital sex? Hell bound?

Judgmental Puritan

 

[SweetSue92]

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

Whom we deem as attractive is not a learned experience. I've known who attracted me since I was 12 years old, High School Cheerleaders and Gymnasts. The problem is as I've grown older I haven't changed in whom I am attracted to. So I'm single and lonely because there aren't a lot of females 40 years old or older who still look like High School Cheerleaders. I'm not attracted to women my own age. And it isn't something I learned, it is what it is.

Can't blame a gay for being gay just as long as they don't flaunt it and ruin the aesthetics.




I've said before I petted a cat and got a hardon. I did not fuck that cat. I have a brain and it controls what I do not my genetically programmed instincts.

You have raised a good point. Unfortunately, our tastes don't change. I'm older now, but my perceptions have not changed and I am not particularly attracted to men my own age. I'm no where near 21 any more, but I recently came across an actor (not personally, tv) who was in his early 20's when I saw him, and he definitely started my (elder) engines. Had I met him under circumstances that included our being around the same age, I never would have let him out of bed.

It's one of the things that sucks about aging. It's something that we all have to live with. He is in his late 30s, and not the great, svelte, athletic, and lithe model/actor beauty he once was (although still very attractive), but he recently was reported to remark that age does this. Now he has to fight in the gym to prevent those love-handles from appearing, since he's still an actor with a rising career and has to take at least his shirt off occasionally for the cameras, but he loves donuts. It happens to all of us.

Good luck in finding someone who floats your boat.

Here we have two grown adults of a mature age telling about how they are attracted to people the age of their grandchildren (if they have grandchildren). And boo hoo, it sucks.

This is really the problem here in the 21st century--it's all about whatever feeeeelings we're having. Hey, you're attracted to people the age of your grandchildren? Meh. You don't "feel" like the sex you are? meh. It's whatever-whatever no matter what the SCIENCE says.