What is wrong with being gay exactly?

[kaz]

No, apparently it's a disease since gay is analyzed by the ... CDC ... Maybe you should take anti-biotics

Nah, my biotics are fine. Just had them calibrated.

Maybe some hormone therapy? Keep trying. My nephew is a biomedical engineer, he says there's a lot of hope to cure gays

Nope...I can make a whore and a virgin moan just fine, thanks for your concern though.

Gays don't need a cure, we're not a disease...but keep telling us how you're a libertarian and not an anti gay bigot why don't you?

My God, you are so stupid it's funny

I think that every time I read one of your posts.

Welcome to the playground, anyone one of syriusly's posts...

 

[kaz]

Are you going to LIVE THERE? Why would you even go there if you think you'd have a problem?

Why would you want to if you're going to be "oppressed"?

Why is it SO IMPORTANT to you if people recognize your lifestyle? Why do they even need to know? Why does THAT define you? Why can't YOU ACCEPT that some people believe it's wrong, and not shove their nose into it?

Only retards and social conservatives think being gay is a choice one can simply repress.

The best minds now believe it's the result of genetic and environmental influences, and those same minds theorize that they will eventually find all of the influences to be genetic.

So what does it matter if it's genetic, or not completely, if it isn't a choice?

Furthermore, why is it a choice you wan't to prevent people from making? How does a gay couple down the street affect yur life at all unless you chose to be part of theirs.

Opposing gay marriage, and worse yet, opposing being gay....is wrong in so many ways.

It just doesn't hurt you....I don't get it

Actually, you're right: you just don't get it.

You've been a sucker for the Left's propaganda....

The CDC made some points that add up to the fact that it may very well be a choice.

1. "This study asks us to consider is whether impressionable young people could be persuaded by seductive others that they are “genetically” homosexual, when in fact they are not–they have simply been sexually aroused by a member of their own sex. The findings of the CDC study seem to indicate that people, especially young people, can be aroused by a member of the same sex without that arousal signaling that they are “genetically” homosexual. Indeed, that so high a percentage of homosexuals have had sex with members of the opposite sex means that such arousal with a person you are not “naturally” attracted to is possible. After all, you can’t have sex without any arousal whatsoever (at least for men).

The take-away, then, is not about numbers like 1.4% (though that’s pretty illuminating)–the take-away, and it is a very important one for young people, is that if you feel aroused by a member of the same sex, that does not necessarily mean that you are “genetically” homosexual. There’s a small chance you are, but a much, much larger chance that you are not. You are not stuck thinking you are gay even if you have had a same-sex encounter.

Free Debt Management Plan Advice - Get help with your debt.


http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf



2. "In fact, numbers show huge majorities of those who "ever had same sex sexual contact" do not identify long-term as gay.Among women 18-44, for instance, 12.5% report some form of same sex contact at some point in their lives, but among the older segment of that group (35-44),only 0.7% identify as homosexual and 1.1% as bisexual.

In other words, for the minority who may have experimented with gay relationships at some juncture in their lives, well over 80% explicitly renounced homosexual (or even bisexual) self-identification by age of 35. For the clear majority of males (as well as women) who report gay encounters, homosexual activity appears to represent a passing phase, or even a fleeting episode, rather than an unshakable, genetically pre-determined orientation."
Column Does it matter if only 1.4 of people are gay - USATODAY.com




Your comment, "Only retards and social conservatives think being gay is a choice one can simply repress" was pretty disgusting.

Glad I could rub your face in it.

That CDC article doesn't support your contention that being gay is a choice.

So we're still at retards and social conservatives that believe gay is a choice.

No, apparently it's a disease since gay is analyzed by the ... CDC ... Maybe you should take anti-biotics

Via genetic testing soon we'll be able to tell if a fetus is gay and abort it before it's born. Problem solved.

Bam! Now we're talking. Sort of like getting Hitler in the womb

 

[PoliticalChic]

Are you going to LIVE THERE? Why would you even go there if you think you'd have a problem?

Why would you want to if you're going to be "oppressed"?

Why is it SO IMPORTANT to you if people recognize your lifestyle? Why do they even need to know? Why does THAT define you? Why can't YOU ACCEPT that some people believe it's wrong, and not shove their nose into it?

Only retards and social conservatives think being gay is a choice one can simply repress.

The best minds now believe it's the result of genetic and environmental influences, and those same minds theorize that they will eventually find all of the influences to be genetic.

So what does it matter if it's genetic, or not completely, if it isn't a choice?

Furthermore, why is it a choice you wan't to prevent people from making? How does a gay couple down the street affect yur life at all unless you chose to be part of theirs.

Opposing gay marriage, and worse yet, opposing being gay....is wrong in so many ways.

It just doesn't hurt you....I don't get it

Actually, you're right: you just don't get it.

You've been a sucker for the Left's propaganda....

The CDC made some points that add up to the fact that it may very well be a choice.

1. "This study asks us to consider is whether impressionable young people could be persuaded by seductive others that they are “genetically” homosexual, when in fact they are not–they have simply been sexually aroused by a member of their own sex. The findings of the CDC study seem to indicate that people, especially young people, can be aroused by a member of the same sex without that arousal signaling that they are “genetically” homosexual. Indeed, that so high a percentage of homosexuals have had sex with members of the opposite sex means that such arousal with a person you are not “naturally” attracted to is possible. After all, you can’t have sex without any arousal whatsoever (at least for men).

The take-away, then, is not about numbers like 1.4% (though that’s pretty illuminating)–the take-away, and it is a very important one for young people, is that if you feel aroused by a member of the same sex, that does not necessarily mean that you are “genetically” homosexual. There’s a small chance you are, but a much, much larger chance that you are not. You are not stuck thinking you are gay even if you have had a same-sex encounter.

Free Debt Management Plan Advice - Get help with your debt.


http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf



2. "In fact, numbers show huge majorities of those who "ever had same sex sexual contact" do not identify long-term as gay.Among women 18-44, for instance, 12.5% report some form of same sex contact at some point in their lives, but among the older segment of that group (35-44),only 0.7% identify as homosexual and 1.1% as bisexual.

In other words, for the minority who may have experimented with gay relationships at some juncture in their lives, well over 80% explicitly renounced homosexual (or even bisexual) self-identification by age of 35. For the clear majority of males (as well as women) who report gay encounters, homosexual activity appears to represent a passing phase, or even a fleeting episode, rather than an unshakable, genetically pre-determined orientation."
Column Does it matter if only 1.4 of people are gay - USATODAY.com




Your comment, "Only retards and social conservatives think being gay is a choice one can simply repress" was pretty disgusting.

Glad I could rub your face in it.

That CDC article doesn't support your contention that being gay is a choice.

So we're still at retards and social conservatives that believe gay is a choice.

No, apparently it's a disease since gay is analyzed by the ... CDC ... Maybe you should take anti-biotics

Via genetic testing soon we'll be able to tell if a fetus is gay and abort it before it's born. Problem solved.

What nonsense.

 

[kaz]

Only retards and social conservatives think being gay is a choice one can simply repress.

The best minds now believe it's the result of genetic and environmental influences, and those same minds theorize that they will eventually find all of the influences to be genetic.

So what does it matter if it's genetic, or not completely, if it isn't a choice?

Furthermore, why is it a choice you wan't to prevent people from making? How does a gay couple down the street affect yur life at all unless you chose to be part of theirs.

Opposing gay marriage, and worse yet, opposing being gay....is wrong in so many ways.

It just doesn't hurt you....I don't get it

Actually, you're right: you just don't get it.

You've been a sucker for the Left's propaganda....

The CDC made some points that add up to the fact that it may very well be a choice.

1. "This study asks us to consider is whether impressionable young people could be persuaded by seductive others that they are “genetically” homosexual, when in fact they are not–they have simply been sexually aroused by a member of their own sex. The findings of the CDC study seem to indicate that people, especially young people, can be aroused by a member of the same sex without that arousal signaling that they are “genetically” homosexual. Indeed, that so high a percentage of homosexuals have had sex with members of the opposite sex means that such arousal with a person you are not “naturally” attracted to is possible. After all, you can’t have sex without any arousal whatsoever (at least for men).

The take-away, then, is not about numbers like 1.4% (though that’s pretty illuminating)–the take-away, and it is a very important one for young people, is that if you feel aroused by a member of the same sex, that does not necessarily mean that you are “genetically” homosexual. There’s a small chance you are, but a much, much larger chance that you are not. You are not stuck thinking you are gay even if you have had a same-sex encounter.

Free Debt Management Plan Advice - Get help with your debt.


http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf



2. "In fact, numbers show huge majorities of those who "ever had same sex sexual contact" do not identify long-term as gay.Among women 18-44, for instance, 12.5% report some form of same sex contact at some point in their lives, but among the older segment of that group (35-44),only 0.7% identify as homosexual and 1.1% as bisexual.

In other words, for the minority who may have experimented with gay relationships at some juncture in their lives, well over 80% explicitly renounced homosexual (or even bisexual) self-identification by age of 35. For the clear majority of males (as well as women) who report gay encounters, homosexual activity appears to represent a passing phase, or even a fleeting episode, rather than an unshakable, genetically pre-determined orientation."
Column Does it matter if only 1.4 of people are gay - USATODAY.com




Your comment, "Only retards and social conservatives think being gay is a choice one can simply repress" was pretty disgusting.

Glad I could rub your face in it.

That CDC article doesn't support your contention that being gay is a choice.

So we're still at retards and social conservatives that believe gay is a choice.

No, apparently it's a disease since gay is analyzed by the ... CDC ... Maybe you should take anti-biotics

Via genetic testing soon we'll be able to tell if a fetus is gay and abort it before it's born. Problem solved.

What nonsense.

It's screwing with SeaWytch. She's on another if you deny gays cake you're Hitler phase. Apparently gays couldn't freely buy cake in Nazi Germany either

 

[Syriusly]

Saying that being gay is not purely genetic is not saying being gay is a choice. How do you not get that?

I'm gay and I know I did not choose to be gay. If you believe you made a choice, we'd call that bi on the spectrum. I'm on the gay side of the spectrum and I didn't choose to be here, but I'm happy here anyway.

I don't care if you are gay.
Really.
But I do care about truth.

But don't deny the evidence that for most, if not all, it is a choice.
Dr. Neil Whitehead and Briar Whitehead state regarding various cultures: "If homosexuality were significantly influenced by genes, it would appear in every culture, but in twenty-nine of seventy-nine cultures surveyed by Ford and Beach in 1952, homosexuality was rare or absent. " My Genes Made Me Do it - a scientific look at sexual orientation," by Dr Neil Whitehead and Briar Whitehead - Chapter 6


Dr. Tahir I. Jaz, M.D., Winnipeg, Canada states: "The increasing claims of being "born that way" parallels the rising political activism of homosexual organisations, who politicise the issue of homosexual origins . In the 1970s, approximately ten percent of homosexuals claimed to be "born homosexual" according to a large scale survey....However, in a survey in the 1980s, with the homosexual rights movement increasingly becoming active, thirty-five percent claimed to be born that way. HOMOSEXUALITY - An Analysis of Biological Theories of Causation

In 1980 a study was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry which stated that eleven former homosexual men became heterosexuals "without explicit treatment and/or long-term psychotherapy" through their participation in a Pentecostal church.
E.M. Pattison and M.L. Pattison, "'Ex-Gays': Religiously Mediated Change in Homosexuals," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 137, pp. 1553-1562, 1980


So....in the light of the above, compare homosexuality to something like blood type, or eye color....lots of folks change those features?

1980? Are you serious?

Welcome to the 21st Century...where only retards and social conservatives believe being gay is a choice.

And in many cases it is choice or deny that bi-sexual group exists?

See how deranged these far left drones are?

Nothing wrong with being gay, just don't be a far left drone as that is the worst thing you could be..

Homosexuality is sexual attraction to the same gender.
Bisexuality is sexual attraction to both genders.
Heterosexuality is sexual attraction to the opposite gender.

You can choose to have sex with any gender- but I have never known anyone who has chosen which gender to be attracted to.

So you do not find any other people of your species attractive? Even though you do not want to have sex with them?

And yes you can choose which to be attracted to, it is choice! You can be attracted to many people even if you do not want to have sex with them....

I guess you are speaking of your own experience.

Which mean have you chosen to be sexually attracted to?

Because in my experience, while I can acknowledge that a man is 'handsome', men don't do a thing for me.

Let me put it another way

I look at this photo and I am sexually attracted

I look at this photo- and I am not

If you find you can be sexually attracted to both- congratulations- you are bisexual.

 

[Syriusly]

Actually, you're right: you just don't get it.

You've been a sucker for the Left's propaganda....

The CDC made some points that add up to the fact that it may very well be a choice.

1. "This study asks us to consider is whether impressionable young people could be persuaded by seductive others that they are “genetically” homosexual, when in fact they are not–they have simply been sexually aroused by a member of their own sex. The findings of the CDC study seem to indicate that people, especially young people, can be aroused by a member of the same sex without that arousal signaling that they are “genetically” homosexual. Indeed, that so high a percentage of homosexuals have had sex with members of the opposite sex means that such arousal with a person you are not “naturally” attracted to is possible. After all, you can’t have sex without any arousal whatsoever (at least for men).

The take-away, then, is not about numbers like 1.4% (though that’s pretty illuminating)–the take-away, and it is a very important one for young people, is that if you feel aroused by a member of the same sex, that does not necessarily mean that you are “genetically” homosexual. There’s a small chance you are, but a much, much larger chance that you are not. You are not stuck thinking you are gay even if you have had a same-sex encounter.

Free Debt Management Plan Advice - Get help with your debt.


http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf



2. "In fact, numbers show huge majorities of those who "ever had same sex sexual contact" do not identify long-term as gay.Among women 18-44, for instance, 12.5% report some form of same sex contact at some point in their lives, but among the older segment of that group (35-44),only 0.7% identify as homosexual and 1.1% as bisexual.

In other words, for the minority who may have experimented with gay relationships at some juncture in their lives, well over 80% explicitly renounced homosexual (or even bisexual) self-identification by age of 35. For the clear majority of males (as well as women) who report gay encounters, homosexual activity appears to represent a passing phase, or even a fleeting episode, rather than an unshakable, genetically pre-determined orientation."
Column Does it matter if only 1.4 of people are gay - USATODAY.com




Your comment, "Only retards and social conservatives think being gay is a choice one can simply repress" was pretty disgusting.

Glad I could rub your face in it.

That CDC article doesn't support your contention that being gay is a choice.

So we're still at retards and social conservatives that believe gay is a choice.

No, apparently it's a disease since gay is analyzed by the ... CDC ... Maybe you should take anti-biotics

Via genetic testing soon we'll be able to tell if a fetus is gay and abort it before it's born. Problem solved.

What nonsense.

It's screwing with SeaWytch. She's on another if you deny gays cake you're Hitler phase. Apparently gays couldn't freely buy cake in Nazi Germany either

Yet....you are the one who brought up Hitler.....

 

[kaz]

That CDC article doesn't support your contention that being gay is a choice.

So we're still at retards and social conservatives that believe gay is a choice.

No, apparently it's a disease since gay is analyzed by the ... CDC ... Maybe you should take anti-biotics

Via genetic testing soon we'll be able to tell if a fetus is gay and abort it before it's born. Problem solved.

What nonsense.

It's screwing with SeaWytch. She's on another if you deny gays cake you're Hitler phase. Apparently gays couldn't freely buy cake in Nazi Germany either

Yet....you are the one who brought up Hitler.....

Yes, any questions? You are one of the idiots who thinks I'm a Republican

 

[Syriusly]

No, apparently it's a disease since gay is analyzed by the ... CDC ... Maybe you should take anti-biotics

Via genetic testing soon we'll be able to tell if a fetus is gay and abort it before it's born. Problem solved.

What nonsense.

It's screwing with SeaWytch. She's on another if you deny gays cake you're Hitler phase. Apparently gays couldn't freely buy cake in Nazi Germany either

Yet....you are the one who brought up Hitler.....

Yes, any questions? n

Glad we cleared that up- once again a homophobe calling out 'Hitler' "Hitler'

 

[kaz]

Via genetic testing soon we'll be able to tell if a fetus is gay and abort it before it's born. Problem solved.

What nonsense.

It's screwing with SeaWytch. She's on another if you deny gays cake you're Hitler phase. Apparently gays couldn't freely buy cake in Nazi Germany either

Yet....you are the one who brought up Hitler.....

Yes, any questions? n

Glad we cleared that up- once again a homophobe calling out 'Hitler' "Hitler'

LOL, why don't you just post that you're stupid and you don't get it and be done with the pretense?

 

[Pete7469]

LOL, why don't you just post that you're stupid and you don't get it and be done with the pretense?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I don't care if you are gay.
Really.
But I do care about truth.

But don't deny the evidence that for most, if not all, it is a choice.
Dr. Neil Whitehead and Briar Whitehead state regarding various cultures: "If homosexuality were significantly influenced by genes, it would appear in every culture, but in twenty-nine of seventy-nine cultures surveyed by Ford and Beach in 1952, homosexuality was rare or absent. " My Genes Made Me Do it - a scientific look at sexual orientation," by Dr Neil Whitehead and Briar Whitehead - Chapter 6


Dr. Tahir I. Jaz, M.D., Winnipeg, Canada states: "The increasing claims of being "born that way" parallels the rising political activism of homosexual organisations, who politicise the issue of homosexual origins . In the 1970s, approximately ten percent of homosexuals claimed to be "born homosexual" according to a large scale survey....However, in a survey in the 1980s, with the homosexual rights movement increasingly becoming active, thirty-five percent claimed to be born that way. HOMOSEXUALITY - An Analysis of Biological Theories of Causation

In 1980 a study was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry which stated that eleven former homosexual men became heterosexuals "without explicit treatment and/or long-term psychotherapy" through their participation in a Pentecostal church.
E.M. Pattison and M.L. Pattison, "'Ex-Gays': Religiously Mediated Change in Homosexuals," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 137, pp. 1553-1562, 1980


So....in the light of the above, compare homosexuality to something like blood type, or eye color....lots of folks change those features?

1980? Are you serious?

Welcome to the 21st Century...where only retards and social conservatives believe being gay is a choice.

So.....when did you change your genetically determined eye color?

Blood type?

Finger prints?


Grow up.

There is a difference in there being a gene and there being a genetic predisposition. Sexuality is a spectrum. Since you believe you made a choice of some sort, it's likely you're more in the middle of the spectrum.

Yes, it's true that sexuality is a spectrum. It's why homosexuals often have sexual predilections that involve minors, at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. .

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

 

[Seawytch]

1980? Are you serious?

Welcome to the 21st Century...where only retards and social conservatives believe being gay is a choice.

So.....when did you change your genetically determined eye color?

Blood type?

Finger prints?


Grow up.

There is a difference in there being a gene and there being a genetic predisposition. Sexuality is a spectrum. Since you believe you made a choice of some sort, it's likely you're more in the middle of the spectrum.

Yes, it's true that sexuality is a spectrum. It's why homosexuals often have sexual predilections that involve minors, at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. .

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

Except they don't...heterosexual male family members do.

 

[kaz]

So.....when did you change your genetically determined eye color?

Blood type?

Finger prints?


Grow up.

There is a difference in there being a gene and there being a genetic predisposition. Sexuality is a spectrum. Since you believe you made a choice of some sort, it's likely you're more in the middle of the spectrum.

Yes, it's true that sexuality is a spectrum. It's why homosexuals often have sexual predilections that involve minors, at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. .

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

Except they don't...heterosexual male family members do.

Based on what? Do you know what the term "rate" means? Or are you just saying 98% commit more nominal incidents than 2% so you're fine?

I'm not arguing a side on this one, it just seems you're arguing the latter sans support

 

[Syriusly]

1980? Are you serious?

Welcome to the 21st Century...where only retards and social conservatives believe being gay is a choice.

So.....when did you change your genetically determined eye color?

Blood type?

Finger prints?


Grow up.

There is a difference in there being a gene and there being a genetic predisposition. Sexuality is a spectrum. Since you believe you made a choice of some sort, it's likely you're more in the middle of the spectrum.

Yes, it's true that sexuality is a spectrum. It's why homosexuals often have sexual predilections that involve minors, at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. .

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

I actually think you are smarter than that, so I am going with you are just being dishonest and showing your homophobic bigotry again.

No- it doesn't make any 'sense' - it is your fabrication.

The 'lion's share' of victims of child sexual abuse are girls, abused by men. Are you trying to imply that gay men are abusing those girls?

No- because once again you ignore the 'lion's share' of the victims of child sexual abuse.

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation

 

[Syriusly]

What nonsense.

It's screwing with SeaWytch. She's on another if you deny gays cake you're Hitler phase. Apparently gays couldn't freely buy cake in Nazi Germany either

Yet....you are the one who brought up Hitler.....

Yes, any questions? n

Glad we cleared that up- once again a homophobe calling out 'Hitler' "Hitler'

LOL, why don't you just post that you're stupid and you don't get it and be done with the pretense?

You do that with every post you make.

 

[Syriusly]

There is a difference in there being a gene and there being a genetic predisposition. Sexuality is a spectrum. Since you believe you made a choice of some sort, it's likely you're more in the middle of the spectrum.

Yes, it's true that sexuality is a spectrum. It's why homosexuals often have sexual predilections that involve minors, at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. .

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

Except they don't...heterosexual male family members do.

Based on what? Do you know what the term "rate" means? Or are you just saying 98% commit more nominal incidents than 2% so you're fine?

I'm not arguing a side on this one, it just seems you're arguing the latter sans support

You never challenged Saint boy when he made his claim 'sans support'

However she is right- the lion's share of child sexual abuse is by male family members to girls- step-fathers, fathers, grandfathers, uncles, brothers, step-brothers.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

So.....when did you change your genetically determined eye color?

Blood type?

Finger prints?


Grow up.

There is a difference in there being a gene and there being a genetic predisposition. Sexuality is a spectrum. Since you believe you made a choice of some sort, it's likely you're more in the middle of the spectrum.

Yes, it's true that sexuality is a spectrum. It's why homosexuals often have sexual predilections that involve minors, at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. .

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

I actually think you are smarter than that, so I am going with you are just being dishonest and showing your homophobic bigotry again.

No- it doesn't make any 'sense' - it is your fabrication.

The 'lion's share' of victims of child sexual abuse are girls, abused by men. Are you trying to imply that gay men are abusing those girls?

No- because once again you ignore the 'lion's share' of the victims of child sexual abuse.

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation

When you run across a homophobe you should ask him.

 

[Slyhunter]

There is a difference in there being a gene and there being a genetic predisposition. Sexuality is a spectrum. Since you believe you made a choice of some sort, it's likely you're more in the middle of the spectrum.

Yes, it's true that sexuality is a spectrum. It's why homosexuals often have sexual predilections that involve minors, at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. .

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

I actually think you are smarter than that, so I am going with you are just being dishonest and showing your homophobic bigotry again.

No- it doesn't make any 'sense' - it is your fabrication.

The 'lion's share' of victims of child sexual abuse are girls, abused by men. Are you trying to imply that gay men are abusing those girls?

No- because once again you ignore the 'lion's share' of the victims of child sexual abuse.

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation

When you run across a homophobe you should ask him.

Raping, especially statutory rape where no force was involved, of a girl isn't considered as serious of a crime as a rape of a boy because fucking girls is natural, fucking assholes isn't.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Yes, it's true that sexuality is a spectrum. It's why homosexuals often have sexual predilections that involve minors, at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. .

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

I actually think you are smarter than that, so I am going with you are just being dishonest and showing your homophobic bigotry again.

No- it doesn't make any 'sense' - it is your fabrication.

The 'lion's share' of victims of child sexual abuse are girls, abused by men. Are you trying to imply that gay men are abusing those girls?

No- because once again you ignore the 'lion's share' of the victims of child sexual abuse.

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation

When you run across a homophobe you should ask him.

Raping, especially statutory rape where no force was involved, of a girl isn't considered as serious of a crime as a rape of a boy because fucking girls is natural, fucking assholes isn't.

Is that how it works out in works out in the penal code? I doubt it. Sexual battery of a child with penetration is a serious crime regardless of the victim's gender. Anyone who does it should be thrown into prison until their dick shrivels.

 

[Syriusly]

And of course that is what the homophobes keep saying- its talk like that that endangers children.

The reality is the group that 'often' has sexual predilections that involve minors are men.

Straight men- gay men- men.

Men are the sexual predators between 90-95% of the time.

And females are by far the most likely victims- depending on age- minor females are the victims 69%-91% of the time.

http://www.drryanhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation.

So then it makes sense that if men are usually the sexual predators, then gay men would take up a lion's share of sexual child abuse. I'm glad we agree.

I actually think you are smarter than that, so I am going with you are just being dishonest and showing your homophobic bigotry again.

No- it doesn't make any 'sense' - it is your fabrication.

The 'lion's share' of victims of child sexual abuse are girls, abused by men. Are you trying to imply that gay men are abusing those girls?

No- because once again you ignore the 'lion's share' of the victims of child sexual abuse.

Why do homophobes so regularly bring up homosexuals and child molesters, when the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, and the majority of victims are females?

Either because they don't care about girls or because they are trying to harm homosexuals.

There is no other rational explanation

When you run across a homophobe you should ask him.

Raping, especially statutory rape where no force was involved, of a girl isn't considered as serious of a crime as a rape of a boy because fucking girls is natural, fucking assholes isn't.

Is that how it works out in works out in the penal code? I doubt it. Sexual battery of a child with penetration is a serious crime regardless of the victim's gender. Anyone who does it should be thrown into prison until their dick shrivels.

One of the rare cases of agreement between us.