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

[Shogun]

You are so dumb, allie...


YOU post evidence.... which ADMITS the biologic factors... and then INSIST that there are no biologic factors and that homosexuality is merely a CHOICE... even though YOUR POSTED EVIDENCE implies otherwise.


yes, Allie. you ARE a dumb one.


to think you have anything to do with the counseling field... Id bet dollars to donuts that you work for a religious organization. Human Services gave it away. Your silly ass hatred of the APA is a dead give away.

By this point, Allie, you are no different than Tom Cruz calling Matt Lauer glib.

think about it.

 

[AllieBaba]

No, it didn't admit biological factors, you idiot. Everything I've posted has stated there's little to no evidence for biological or genetic factors, but despite this fact, there are some who continue to claim there must be.

You're so easily misled. Read the stuff again until you truly comprehend it. This is what happens when you devote your life to bastardizing the language. You lose the ability to understand it.

And your bigotry is showing. I've never worked for a religious organization. And "human services" is not religious jargon, nitwit. It's your beloved big-government, politically correct, psychobabble jargon.

 

[Shogun]

Most scientists agree that it is unlikely that there is a single "gay gene" that determines something as complex as sexual orientation, and that it is more likely to be the result of an interaction of genetic, biological and environmental/cultural factors. However, in the fruitfly Drosophila melanogaster, mutant alleles of the fruitless gene were found to cause male flies to court and attempt to mate exclusively with other males.


YOUR evidence, again.


Just read this to yourself over and over again until you get why you are showing your stupid side.

 

[Big_D]

An expert on brain anatomy and sexual orientation..what does that mean? A gay surgeon????

The fact of the matter is, geneticists don't agree. And brains can and are modified by our choices. Children raised in high-stress environments have different brain structure and reactions than those raised in other environments.

Is that one not good enough for you? Here are some more.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn548

http://www-cgi.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/scotts/OldFiles/bulgarians/nih-upi.html

Also if you do think that being gay is a choice then answer me one thing. Why would a heterosexual want to engage in homosexual activities? I personally do not think that there is anything bad about being gay, but if a guy is attracted to women why would he choose to be attracted to and have relations with another man? Obviously, you are heterosexual. So therefore you would never be compelled to have relations with someone of your own gender. Then, if everyone is born like you, why would they ever be attracted to someone of the same gender and form relations with them?

 

[mattskramer]

Is that one not good enough for you? Here are some more.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn548

http://www-cgi.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/scotts/OldFiles/bulgarians/nih-upi.html

Also if you do think that being gay is a choice then answer me one thing. Why would a heterosexual want to engage in homosexual activities? I personally do not think that there is anything bad about being gay, but if a guy is attracted to women why would he choose to be attracted to and have relations with another man? Obviously, you are heterosexual. So therefore you would never be compelled to have relations with someone of your own gender. Then, if everyone is born like you, why would they ever be attracted to someone of the same gender and form relations with them?

Brief curiosity, interest, bisexuality. Finding one particular person of the same sex physically and sexually attractive. Anyway, in my book, it just does not matter.

 

[doniston]

No, it didn't admit biological factors, you idiot. Everything I've posted has stated there's little to no evidence for biological or genetic factors, but despite this fact, there are some who continue to claim there must be.

You're so easily misled. Read the stuff again until you truly comprehend it. This is what happens when you devote your life to bastardizing the language. You lose the ability to understand it.

And your bigotry is showing. I've never worked for a religious organization. And "human services" is not religious jargon, nitwit. It's your beloved big-government, politically correct, psychobabble jargon.

Look bitch, (and I do beleive you are a female)

"Little to no evidence" is NOT "none"

 

[Shogun]

now Donnie...

take it down a notch.

 

[doniston]

now Donnie...

take it down a notch.

SHE is the psychobabelist here.

 

[Big_D]

Brief curiosity, interest, bisexuality. Finding one particular person of the same sex physically and sexually attractive. Anyway, in my book, it just does not matter.

THis makes no sense at all. If a heterosexual found someone of the same sex attractive, then they wouldnt be a heterosexual at all, would they? Also, if someone was briefly curious then they would only engage in a homosexual experience once.

 

[mattskramer]

THis makes no sense at all. If a heterosexual found someone of the same sex attractive, then they wouldnt be a heterosexual at all, would they? Also, if someone was briefly curious then they would only engage in a homosexual experience once.

Preference is not black-and-white. Some days someone might like chocolate ice cream. Later, he might like vanilla. After some time has passed, he might get tired of vanilla and like chocolate. Sometimes he might like both flavors. How many ties must one experiment or be curious about homosexual behavior before he is declared a homosexual once, twice, three times in 10 years? Why have the distinction at all?

 

[007]

Preference is not black-and-white. Some days someone might like chocolate ice cream. Later, he might like vanilla. After some time has passed, he might get tired of vanilla and like chocolate. Sometimes he might like both flavors. How many ties must one experiment or be curious about homosexual behavior before he is declared a homosexual once, twice, three times in 10 years? Why have the distinction at all?

So you've moved from comparing sex to cigarettes to ice cream now aye? What part about sex is it that you don't understand? The part about men are intended by the very laws of this universe and nature to be solely with a woman? It's not a bowl of ice cream. It's written in stone nature. You're sick twisting and blurring of concrete laws is, well, SICK! You are part of the problem.

 

[AllieBaba]

Preference is not black-and-white. Some days someone might like chocolate ice cream. Later, he might like vanilla. After some time has passed, he might get tired of vanilla and like chocolate. Sometimes he might like both flavors. How many ties must one experiment or be curious about homosexual behavior before he is declared a homosexual once, twice, three times in 10 years? Why have the distinction at all?

In other words, it's a choice.

 

[Shogun]

then choose to go gay, Allie...

show us how it's done.

 

[AllieBaba]

I choose not to.

 

[Shogun]

of course you do, Allie.


of course you do.

 

[mattskramer]

In other words, it's a choice.

I agree that it is a choice. I might be a strong choice like trying to change from being left handed to being right handed but it is a choice in my opinion With enough of a desire to change and enough conditioning, a heterosexual can become a homosexual (or at least bisexual) and a homosexual can become a heterosexual.

 

[Shogun]

yea.. I guess Gandhi did CHOOSE not to eat, you know...

 

[mattskramer]

So you've moved from comparing sex to cigarettes to ice cream now aye? What part about sex is it that you don't understand? The part about men are intended by the very laws of this universe and nature to be solely with a woman? It's not a bowl of ice cream. It's written in stone nature. You're sick twisting and blurring of concrete laws is, well, SICK! You are part of the problem.

Are you still resorting to the natural law and purpose fallacy? As I already explained many times, nature merely shows you what is. It does not show you what should be or what should not be. Hurricanes are natural. Cancer is natural (if you live long enough you will get cancer.) Chemotherapy and radiation therapy is not natural. The next time that you get cancer, just let nature take its course. An encyclopedia was not intended to be a high-chair. Yet, it can still be used as such. Did “god” intend for the bridge of one’s nose to be used to hold reading glasses? Things do not have to be used for only those things for which it was supposedly intended. I have a small toe. I have yet to discover its intended porous. Things can serve multiple purposes. On one particularly cold day, I had no gloves, but I had an extra pair of socks. I discovered that socks work pretty well at keeping your hands warm.

It is understood that you should be careful when you use thing for their unintended purpose. A child could fall off an encyclopedia used as a highchair. Cold air could still seep through the socks. Still, there is no law saying that you can’t use things for which they were not intended.

 

[mattskramer]

yea.. I guess Gandhi did CHOOSE not to eat, you know...

He did choose to not eat. What is your point?

 

[Shogun]

my point is that you could likewise choose to be asexual but that doesn't really have anything to do with orientation, does it?

I'm glad the lefty example was brought up. If one were forced to write with their Right hand while being a lefty... does this erase their proficiency with using their left hand?

Sure, Gandhi chose... but he was still hungry, eh? Sure, gays can choose NOT to act upon their sexual orientation... but does that make them any less attracted to men? Would you be able to choose to be attracted to men for a month even if you chose to be asexual?