Liberal ignorance of Biology

[Redfish]

Don't get TOO hung up on the attraction part of these decisions. If it's "biology" or "neurology" -- you'd than have to find an essentially different basis in neuro or bio to explain the MUCH LARGER SEGMENT of the population who are BI-sexual or opportunistically bisexual. This dominant and HUGE sector of the LGBTQY community seems to be totally out of convenience and choice..

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

I didn't go there. I used "convenient" to describe bisexual behavior. Can't be the same bio or mental "wiring" argument -- therefore BI is NOT the same syndrome as being Lesbian or Homo... YET -- most folks look at it all as bio or mental pre-determined "sexual preference".

There's THREE of the LGBTQY community segments representing the VAST majority of member that aren't MOTIVATED in the same way for their behavior. So "attraction" seems more of a convenient CHOICE for the Bisexers then anything pre-wired as biological or mental..

We don't know to what degree it is biological vs mental

What we do know is that it doesn't matter. People should be able to choose the person they love regardless of the contributing factors

And a baker should be able to say "please use someone else" without having to choose between their conscience or financial ruin.

Same thing as "we don't serve n*ggers here"

The merchants felt just as strongly about it

not the same at all. but I understand your problem, you just don't get it.

 

[martybegan]

The answer is....NO

Lesbian couples have very high rates of procreation

And how do they do that?

They "cheat", via technology just like I cheat walking over a cliff with technology with my glasses.

The answer actually is yes, but you can't be truthful without breaking with progressive dogma, it's sad to be so close minded.

Again, this has nothing to do with morality, just honesty.

Your question was not about the physiology of artificial insemination

Your question was....." does not being attracted to someone of the opposite sex reduce your chance of procreating or not?"

Lesbians are not attracted to someone of the opposite sex, yet the vast majority of young lesbian couples procreate

Don't get TOO hung up on the attraction part of these decisions. If it's "biology" or "neurology" -- you'd than have to find an essentially different basis in neuro or bio to explain the MUCH LARGER SEGMENT of the population who are BI-sexual or opportunistically bisexual. This dominant and HUGE sector of the LGBTQY community seems to be totally out of convenience and choice..

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

there are plenty of gay bakers, why cant you use one of them?

As an aside i have noticed we don't have this issue with Florists....

 

[Redfish]

And how do they do that?

They "cheat", via technology just like I cheat walking over a cliff with technology with my glasses.

The answer actually is yes, but you can't be truthful without breaking with progressive dogma, it's sad to be so close minded.

Again, this has nothing to do with morality, just honesty.

Your question was not about the physiology of artificial insemination

Your question was....." does not being attracted to someone of the opposite sex reduce your chance of procreating or not?"

Lesbians are not attracted to someone of the opposite sex, yet the vast majority of young lesbian couples procreate

Don't get TOO hung up on the attraction part of these decisions. If it's "biology" or "neurology" -- you'd than have to find an essentially different basis in neuro or bio to explain the MUCH LARGER SEGMENT of the population who are BI-sexual or opportunistically bisexual. This dominant and HUGE sector of the LGBTQY community seems to be totally out of convenience and choice..

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

there are plenty of gay bakers, why cant you use one of them?

As an aside i have noticed we don't have this issue with Florists....

good point, and I don't think that all florists are gay.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

What we do know is that it doesn't matter. People should be able to choose the person they love regardless of the contributing factors

What if a fifty-five-year-old chooses to “love” a five-year-old? Or his brother? Or a goat? Or a forklift?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Same thing as "we don't serve n*ggers here"

The merchants felt just as strongly about it

Right. Because being black is exactly comparable to being a sick, immoral, sexual pervert.

 

[Seawytch]

Do any of you nuts realize that the BRAIN is part of one's 'biology'?

The brain telling you your gender is something other than what you were born with is a abnormality.

Oh yeah, doctor Marty? And the recommended treatment is?

Maybe therapy to make you work through it? Cosmetic surgery to pretend you are a gender you are not should be a last resort.

So you don't know what the recommended treatment is? You spoke as though you were an expert.

Where did I post any credentials?

Why do you always appeal to authority to escape discussing the topic at hand?

You posted that transgendered people have an "abnormality". I'm asking what the recommended treatment is for those that "seek professional help" for their "abnormality".

I have a feeling it's not what you, who is not an authority on the subject, would recommend.

 

[Seawytch]

Not everyone procreates

That doesn't answer the question.

Answer the question.

The answer is that not everyone needs to procreate..... so if someone is homosexual, infertile or just doesn't want kids does not matter

Again, not answering the question.

Does not being attracted to members of the opposite sex make you less likely to procreate?

Why can't you just answer the question?

There is no mandate to reproduce.

I never said there was. All I asked was does not being attracted to members of the opposite sex make you less likely to procreate?

Why can't you answer that simple question?

Not in the 21st Century it does not.

 

[Seawytch]

[

You're pretty free to IDENTIFY as anything you want. Be a tree frog if that's what your biological drive tells you to be. But the problem is --- you CANNOT PASS LAWS and define new protected classes based on how one "feels" that morning when they get up... Can't be enforced. Doesn't make sense.

...

We protect religion. That by definition is how a person feels.

But there are no legal accommodations to religion other than not to tax it or to inhibit it or promote one over the others. It's not a "protected class". CLEARLY you can defame religions to your hearts content. And there are no special benefits accorded them. Apparently, that also extends to sanctioning the meaning of marriage or exercising your conscience in providing public services. Declaring yourself Baptist tomorrow would not get you any legal protections as to your "public accommodations". Can't REQUIRE someone that refer to you by a different pronoun or get different bathroom privileges.

The ONLY exceptions that come to mind are Quaker types who readily got draft deferments during the draft. But -- those were available to most anyone with a great story.

It's complete chaos and anarchy when folks are allowed to gender bend or race bend at their will. They NEED to be CERTIFIED by the Med/Psych community to achieve any resemblance to sanity.. OR -- we truly need to get BEYOND slicing and polarizing the populace by race and sex at all...

WRONG!!!!

It is illegal to discriminate on the basis of religion in ALL 50 states.

Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination because of race, color, religion, or national origin.

I MUST serve the Christian in all 50 states. The Christian must only serve me in about half. Make it even.

 

[rightwinger]

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

I didn't go there. I used "convenient" to describe bisexual behavior. Can't be the same bio or mental "wiring" argument -- therefore BI is NOT the same syndrome as being Lesbian or Homo... YET -- most folks look at it all as bio or mental pre-determined "sexual preference".

There's THREE of the LGBTQY community segments representing the VAST majority of member that aren't MOTIVATED in the same way for their behavior. So "attraction" seems more of a convenient CHOICE for the Bisexers then anything pre-wired as biological or mental..

We don't know to what degree it is biological vs mental

What we do know is that it doesn't matter. People should be able to choose the person they love regardless of the contributing factors

And a baker should be able to say "please use someone else" without having to choose between their conscience or financial ruin.

Same thing as "we don't serve n*ggers here"

The merchants felt just as strongly about it

They have said they are not refusing service of point of sale items, just items for the ceremony.

And no, it's not the same because that discrimination was systemic and promoted by the local governments via Jim Crow laws.

Plus, only idiotic interpretations of the bible advocate racial discrimination, as opposed to almost all interpretations that condemn homosexuality.

Same thing, different century

 

[rightwinger]

What we do know is that it doesn't matter. People should be able to choose the person they love regardless of the contributing factors

What if a fifty-five-year-old chooses to “love” a five-year-old? Or his brother? Or a goat? Or a forklift?

Those things are against the law ....except the forklift

 

[Chuz Life]

Don't get TOO hung up on the attraction part of these decisions. If it's "biology" or "neurology" -- you'd than have to find an essentially different basis in neuro or bio to explain the MUCH LARGER SEGMENT of the population who are BI-sexual or opportunistically bisexual. This dominant and HUGE sector of the LGBTQY community seems to be totally out of convenience and choice..

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

I didn't go there. I used "convenient" to describe bisexual behavior. Can't be the same bio or mental "wiring" argument -- therefore BI is NOT the same syndrome as being Lesbian or Homo... YET -- most folks look at it all as bio or mental pre-determined "sexual preference".

There's THREE of the LGBTQY community segments representing the VAST majority of member that aren't MOTIVATED in the same way for their behavior. So "attraction" seems more of a convenient CHOICE for the Bisexers then anything pre-wired as biological or mental..

We don't know to what degree it is biological vs mental

What we do know is that it doesn't matter. People should be able to choose the person they love regardless of the contributing factors

And a baker should be able to say "please use someone else" without having to choose between their conscience or financial ruin.

Same thing as "we don't serve n*ggers here"

The merchants felt just as strongly about it

If a black business owner doesn't want to serve whites or gays. . . They should be free to deny themselves that source of revenue too.

For the most part, that problem will eventually take care of itself. Money talks.

 

[rightwinger]

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

I didn't go there. I used "convenient" to describe bisexual behavior. Can't be the same bio or mental "wiring" argument -- therefore BI is NOT the same syndrome as being Lesbian or Homo... YET -- most folks look at it all as bio or mental pre-determined "sexual preference".

There's THREE of the LGBTQY community segments representing the VAST majority of member that aren't MOTIVATED in the same way for their behavior. So "attraction" seems more of a convenient CHOICE for the Bisexers then anything pre-wired as biological or mental..

We don't know to what degree it is biological vs mental

What we do know is that it doesn't matter. People should be able to choose the person they love regardless of the contributing factors

And a baker should be able to say "please use someone else" without having to choose between their conscience or financial ruin.

Same thing as "we don't serve n*ggers here"

The merchants felt just as strongly about it

If a black business owner doesn't want to serve whites or gays. . . They should be free to deny themselves that source of revenue too.

For the most part, that problem will eventually take care of itself. Money talks.

We resolved this shit 50 years ago

Your side lost

 

[rightwinger]

The answer is....NO

Lesbian couples have very high rates of procreation

And how do they do that?

They "cheat", via technology just like I cheat walking over a cliff with technology with my glasses.

The answer actually is yes, but you can't be truthful without breaking with progressive dogma, it's sad to be so close minded.

Again, this has nothing to do with morality, just honesty.

Your question was not about the physiology of artificial insemination

Your question was....." does not being attracted to someone of the opposite sex reduce your chance of procreating or not?"

Lesbians are not attracted to someone of the opposite sex, yet the vast majority of young lesbian couples procreate

Don't get TOO hung up on the attraction part of these decisions. If it's "biology" or "neurology" -- you'd than have to find an essentially different basis in neuro or bio to explain the MUCH LARGER SEGMENT of the population who are BI-sexual or opportunistically bisexual. This dominant and HUGE sector of the LGBTQY community seems to be totally out of convenience and choice..

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

there are plenty of gay bakers, why cant you use one of them?

Because that is not the way this country works

Separate but equal was abandoned in the 1950s

 

[rightwinger]

Same thing as "we don't serve n*ggers here"

The merchants felt just as strongly about it

Right. Because being black is exactly comparable to being a sick, immoral, sexual pervert.

No

But being oppressed is being oppressed

 

[flacaltenn]

And how do they do that?

They "cheat", via technology just like I cheat walking over a cliff with technology with my glasses.

The answer actually is yes, but you can't be truthful without breaking with progressive dogma, it's sad to be so close minded.

Again, this has nothing to do with morality, just honesty.

Your question was not about the physiology of artificial insemination

Your question was....." does not being attracted to someone of the opposite sex reduce your chance of procreating or not?"

Lesbians are not attracted to someone of the opposite sex, yet the vast majority of young lesbian couples procreate

Don't get TOO hung up on the attraction part of these decisions. If it's "biology" or "neurology" -- you'd than have to find an essentially different basis in neuro or bio to explain the MUCH LARGER SEGMENT of the population who are BI-sexual or opportunistically bisexual. This dominant and HUGE sector of the LGBTQY community seems to be totally out of convenience and choice..

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

I didn't go there. I used "convenient" to describe bisexual behavior. Can't be the same bio or mental "wiring" argument -- therefore BI is NOT the same syndrome as being Lesbian or Homo... YET -- most folks look at it all as bio or mental pre-determined "sexual preference".

There's THREE of the LGBTQY community segments representing the VAST majority of member that aren't MOTIVATED in the same way for their behavior. So "attraction" seems more of a convenient CHOICE for the Bisexers then anything pre-wired as biological or mental..

We don't know to what degree it is biological vs mental

What we do know is that it doesn't matter. People should be able to choose the person they love regardless of the contributing factors

80% of America has no problem with that. There are EXISTING legal docs to do that. EVERYONE should have a Medical Power of Atty and a Will. You can put all your assets in trust or accounts jointly. 80% of America would also grant State recognition of that choice. Just call it Pairiage instead of Marriage. Just don't go asking for a license of "acceptance" that it's the same relationship. It's not. Legally, it HAS to be handled differently. Because family law is steeped in decisions that MAKE BIOLOGICAL CHOICES all the time about child custody and support or spousal abuse or alimony or any OTHER fall-out of existing male/female marriage.

There are other forms of relationships that occur out of "choice and convenience. Such as Poly-Amory. Where one couple WANT to "marry" another couple (or two or three). So falling back on "who you love" as the ONLY test -- is not on solid ground..

 

[flacaltenn]

NewsWeek says the number of polyamorous families in the US numbers about 500,000. That's TEN middle sized cities worth of "definition and legal issues". Is this Bio? or is it choice? Seems like the latter. PolyAm sex is NOT always completely hetero. So the variations are many. This is in addition to "open marriages' and other "loving coupling" arrangements.

Polyamory: The Next Sexual Revolution?

 

[Chuz Life]

I didn't go there. I used "convenient" to describe bisexual behavior. Can't be the same bio or mental "wiring" argument -- therefore BI is NOT the same syndrome as being Lesbian or Homo... YET -- most folks look at it all as bio or mental pre-determined "sexual preference".

There's THREE of the LGBTQY community segments representing the VAST majority of member that aren't MOTIVATED in the same way for their behavior. So "attraction" seems more of a convenient CHOICE for the Bisexers then anything pre-wired as biological or mental..

We don't know to what degree it is biological vs mental

What we do know is that it doesn't matter. People should be able to choose the person they love regardless of the contributing factors

And a baker should be able to say "please use someone else" without having to choose between their conscience or financial ruin.

Same thing as "we don't serve n*ggers here"

The merchants felt just as strongly about it

If a black business owner doesn't want to serve whites or gays. . . They should be free to deny themselves that source of revenue too.

For the most part, that problem will eventually take care of itself. Money talks.

We resolved this shit 50 years ago

Your side lost

If the shit is still going on and being debated to thisvday.... how "resolved" was it? Really.

 

[keepitreal]

Do any of you nuts realize that the BRAIN is part of one's 'biology'?

The brain telling you your gender is something other than what you were born with is a abnormality.

Maybe so is wanting to own 50 guns.

Totally different things, but nice try.

You are right they are completely different things. The rights ideoligy of being against gun control cause thousands of deaths anually in the US. The lefts ideoligy of letting people be themselves sexually, if it doesn't hurt anybody, causes those people to be happy.

You are right they are completely different things. The rights ideoligy of being against gun control cause thousands of deaths anually in the US. The lefts ideoligy of letting people be themselves sexually, if it doesn't hurt anybody, causes those people to be happy.

People texting and driving cause thousands of deaths annually.
So, should cell phones and cars be restricted?

Guns don't kill, PEOPLE do

Fucking kids and animals make certain people happy too

The rights ideology holds people accountable
The lefts ideology is a parasitic infestation plaguing society

This is what happens when you allow one perversion...
it opens the door for all the rest!

 

[Redfish]

And how do they do that?

They "cheat", via technology just like I cheat walking over a cliff with technology with my glasses.

The answer actually is yes, but you can't be truthful without breaking with progressive dogma, it's sad to be so close minded.

Again, this has nothing to do with morality, just honesty.

Your question was not about the physiology of artificial insemination

Your question was....." does not being attracted to someone of the opposite sex reduce your chance of procreating or not?"

Lesbians are not attracted to someone of the opposite sex, yet the vast majority of young lesbian couples procreate

Don't get TOO hung up on the attraction part of these decisions. If it's "biology" or "neurology" -- you'd than have to find an essentially different basis in neuro or bio to explain the MUCH LARGER SEGMENT of the population who are BI-sexual or opportunistically bisexual. This dominant and HUGE sector of the LGBTQY community seems to be totally out of convenience and choice..

You think that our society has made it "convenient" to be lesbian or gay?

We have to fight for a freak'n wedding cake

there are plenty of gay bakers, why cant you use one of them?

Because that is not the way this country works

Separate but equal was abandoned in the 1950s

don't be so fricken naïve. The gay couple went to the Christian baker on purpose to try to stir up shit. It has nothing to do with separate but equal. Nice try, but FAIL

 

[Redfish]

Same thing as "we don't serve n*ggers here"

The merchants felt just as strongly about it

Right. Because being black is exactly comparable to being a sick, immoral, sexual pervert.

No

But being oppressed is being oppressed

how are you being oppressed? just curious