The Homosexual Agenda, The aclu, And Your Children...

[Larkinn]

\
And you're assumption that it "can't be helped" has nothing to do with reality. It has been proven, ad nauseum, that gayness is a choice, not a biological fact. Just like being Christian is a choice, not a biological fact.

Actually, no, the claim has been made repeatedly that homosexuality isn't a choice. But there's no proof that it's true, and quite a bit of evidence to the contrary.

The claim has NOT been made by me that it is not a choice. The claim HAS been made by you that it is NOT a choice. Therefore back it up with links, or back down.

Although from Jillians post I see now why you won't provide the links...because they don't support your pov. Amusing really...just as you quoted the Hamer study as supporting your pov, you quoted that as supporting your view as well?

 

[jillian]

The "Bern study" doesn't pop up on Google. That and really, if you want to support a position do your own work. You made the claim, so ostensibly you have some idea where it came from, so back it up.

I googled

Bern study sexuality to get the link.

 

[AllieBaba]

For people who insist homosexuality is hardwired, you appear to not have a lot of background on the subject.

 

[AllieBaba]

The claim has NOT been made by me that it is not a choice. The claim HAS been made by you that it is NOT a choice. Therefore back it up with links, or back down.

Although from Jillians post I see now why you won't provide the links...because they don't support your pov. Amusing really...just as you quoted the Hamer study as supporting your pov, you quoted that as supporting your view as well?

No, the claim has been made by me that it IS a choice, genius. In direct contradiction to myriad references and insistence that it's NOT a choice.

The Hamer study does support my pov, despite the fact that he tried really hard to make the point otherwise. He really wanted to prove without a doubt that homosexuals can't help it. He failed.

And so does the Bern study.

 

[jillian]

For people who insist homosexuality is hardwired, you appear to not have a lot of background on the subject.

Far more than you apparently. Particularly given that you tossed around the name of a study which didn't say what you said it did. ;o)

I think perhaps we just aren't as obsessed with it as you are since most of us have gay friends or family or co-workers and really couldn't care less who they love.

 

[Larkinn]

For people who insist homosexuality is hardwired, you appear to not have a lot of background on the subject.

I am NOT insisting its hardwired.

The Hamer study does support my pov, despite the fact that he tried really hard to make the point otherwise. He really wanted to prove without a doubt that homosexuals can't help it. He failed.

Learn some logic, then get back to me. His failure does NOT support your pov.

 

[AllieBaba]

My pov is that it's not hardwired.

It's not, as indicated by his study and the multiple studies aside from that one. There's absolutely no evidence that it's hardwired.

What does that mean? Why, it must mean that it's NOT HARDWIRED. They tried to prove it (repeatedly) and they failed (repeatedly) which leads most intelligent humans to the understanding that, garsh, it must just not be so.

Well, my logic is intact. How's yours?

 

[Larkinn]

My pov is that it's not hardwired.

It's not, as indicated by his study and the multiple studies aside from that one. There's absolutely no evidence that it's hardwired.

Actually both the Bern and the Hamer studies came to the conclusion that it may be hardwired.

What does that mean? Why, it must mean that it's NOT HARDWIRED. They tried to prove it (repeatedly) and they failed (repeatedly) which leads most intelligent humans to the understanding that, garsh, it must just not be so.

No, it leads most idiots who don't know logic to believe that.

Well, my logic is intact. How's yours?

No, actually your logic is terrible. Educate yourself for the love of god...

 

[AllieBaba]

They came to the conclusion that they couldn't prove it was hardwired. Which was the purpose of the study in both cases...an optimistic person with an agenda then tries to save the study by qualifying it with "may" but the result is the same, and the scientific community recognizes that.

 

[Larkinn]

They came to the conclusion that they couldn't prove it was hardwired. Which was the purpose of the study in both cases...an optimistic person with an agenda then tries to save the study by qualifying it with "may" but the result is the same, and the scientific community recognizes that.

*sigh*

Can you prove that there are aliens?

Can you prove string theory?

Can you prove evolution?

Can you prove God exists?

Can you prove the big bang theory?

None of those are provable at this time. Therefore, by your own retarded logic, they are all false.

 

[AllieBaba]

And I would never go around harping that those things are true, if studies existed to show they weren't.

 

[Larkinn]

And I would never go around harping that those things are true, if studies existed to show they weren't.

But neither would you go harping that they are false, merely because they haven't been proven. So, why the double standard for homosexuality?

 

[AllieBaba]

There's no double standard. The hard-wired theory has had its day in court, and it was convicted.

 

[Larkinn]

There's no double standard. The hard-wired theory has had its day in court, and it was convicted.

Please...explain in detail why you make a judgement about homosexuality, but NOT the rest of the things listed even though individuals have tried to prove claims about each of them, and failed.

 

[AllieBaba]

I don't believe in aliens, because there's never been any proof that they exist.
I do believe in evolution, though not to the exclusion of God. We see the evidence of evolution, we know that populations evolve.
I don't subscribe to the Big Bang theory. It hasn't been proven.
I can't prove God exists, but neither can you prove he doesn't. Which means it's a matter of faith and choice.

Just like homosexuality.

So where's the problem? I'm consistent....and you spell judgment without an e in the middle.

I learned that while preparing judgments for the court.

 

[Larkinn]

I don't believe in aliens, because there's never been any proof that they exist.
I do believe in evolution, though not to the exclusion of God. We see the evidence of evolution, we know that populations evolve.
I don't subscribe to the Big Bang theory. It hasn't been proven.
I can't prove God exists, but neither can you prove he doesn't. Which means it's a matter of faith and choice.

Just like homosexuality.

So now you are saying homosexuality is a matter of "faith and choice" where as before you were saying being gay was definitely a choice?

and you spell judgment without an e in the middle.

I learned that while preparing judgments for the court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgement

The spelling judgment is found in the Authorized Version of the Bible. However, the spelling judgement (with e added) largely replaced judgment in the United Kingdom in a non-legal context, possibly because writing dg without a following e for the /dʒ/ was seen as an incorrect spelling. In the context of the law, however, judgment is preferred. In the U.S. judgment strongly prevails. As with many such spelling differences, both forms are equally acceptable in Canada and Australia, although judgment is more common in Canada and judgement in Australia.[1] In New Zealand the form judgment is the preferred spelling in dictionaries, newspapers and legislation, although the variant judgement can also be found in all three categories. In South Africa, judgement is the more common form. See further at American and British English spelling differences.

Besides the fact that we aren't talking about a Judgment that a judge hands down, we are talking about judgement in a non-legal context.

 

[AllieBaba]

I'm not in the United Kingdom, Australia or Canada. And this is a US forum, as you can see from the name of it. "US Message Board". Sorry, I should have known you weren't American.

And since I was referring both to my belief in God and to homosexuality, I thought you'd catch on that when I said it's a matter of faith and choice, you would understand that I was referring to both. Not just homosexuality.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I'm not in the United Kingdom, Australia or Canada. And this is a US forum, as you can see from the name of it. "US Message Board". Sorry, I should have known you weren't American.

No, scratch the "faith" from the homosexuality comment. It's a matter of choice.

You can forget it. When Larkinn runs out of real argument he always resorts to word games, spelling games and twisting meanings.

 

[Larkinn]

I'm not in the United Kingdom, Australia or Canada. And this is a US forum, as you can see from the name of it. "US Message Board". Sorry, I should have known you weren't American.

The point was that it is accepted, as most international spellings are, both ways in America. Besides the fact that we are talking about it in a non-legal context.

No, scratch the "faith" from the homosexuality comment. It's a matter of choice.

Its a matter of choice whether to believe its choice/genetics, or its a matter of choice to be gay? Because you've only provided any support for one of those assertions.

 

[Larkinn]

You can forget it. When Larkinn runs out of real argument he always resorts to word games, spelling games and twisting meanings.

This from the boy who ran away from the argument. Whatsa matter RGS, can't answer my responses to you?