NationStates Jolt Archive

For those who say that their God doesn't make anyone gay... That it's a just a choice, would you even change your mind on the issue if sufficient evidence were produced suddenlyshowing that there is a definite genetic conncection?
I think most would still insist that "the earth is flat", so to speak.
Would you accept that you have had the wrong opinion or just stick with your prejudices?

I'm gay AND the Earth is flat? Omg......... Jk

Damn, I shoud've titled this one "God Is A Fag Today" or something. Sensationalism or vague titles works great on this forum!

For those who say that their God doesn't make anyone gay... That it's a just a choice, would you even change your mind on the issue if sufficient evidence were produced suddenlyshowing that there is a definite genetic conncection?
I think most would still insist that "the earth is flat", so to speak.
Would you accept that you have had the wrong opinion or just stick with your prejudices?

Only if you could prove it geneticly for every single person on the planet, gay or not.

And as a side note, none of my gods, or goddesses regulate anyones sexual preference, they don't care enough about that to bother.

Most fundies would just resist. They want so much to believe that homosexuality is a sin, that no amount of very present evidence will make them even think about maybe sorta kinda considering the idea that the prohibition might not have come directly from God's mouth.

For those who say that their God doesn't make anyone gay... That it's a just a choice, would you even change your mind on the issue if sufficient evidence were produced suddenlyshowing that there is a definite genetic conncection?
I think most would still insist that "the earth is flat", so to speak.
Would you accept that you have had the wrong opinion or just stick with your prejudices?

I think that is a little harsh. Nobody knows what really makes anyone gay. Maybe there is a gene for it but I don't know I'm not a biologist. I don't know why all you gay rights people have to insist that it is not a choice and that is the complete and total answer and everything else is evil.. To me it sounds like you are implying that while homosexuality may be wrong but that don't blame homosexuals because it is not their fault. I don't care if it is a choice or not, it doesn't bother me a bit either way. However I tend to think it is also a product of your surroundings at least partly. Who here didn't know a girl or two in high school who pretended to be bi or lesbian for a while just to be cool? Look at ancient greece every body was doing little boys in the butt, read the Symposium by plato or watch Alexander to see what I mean. Did all these Greeks carry the gay gene? I kind of doubt it.

Only if you could prove it geneticly for every single person on the planet, gay or not.

I don't think I'm hearing you correctly. Do you mean that everyone would need to be genetically tested for a "gay gene" before you'd believe it?

Do we need to test everyone who's born blind because of their genes before we believe God makes babies blind? (He does, and we know which genes are responsible).

Hopefully, that wasn't your line of reasoning.

Hey, i am genetically predisposed to kill people...so you have to let me kill people...right?

Hey, i am genetically predisposed to kill people...so you have to let me kill people...right?

Hi, Homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone. Murder does. You lose.

I don't think I'm hearing you correctly. Do you mean that everyone would need to be genetically tested for a "gay gene" before you'd believe it?

Do we need to test everyone who's born blind because of their genes before we believe God makes babies blind? (He does, and we know which genes are responsible).

Hopefully, that wasn't your line of reasoning.


I'm saying that if you want to say everyone who is gay, is so because of their genes (I don't believe any god makes it so, so your "God says so" argument isn't relevant to me, I want you to know that incase you decide to go the way alot of people I talk to go, and that is assume that I believe what they do). Anyway, if you want to say everyone who is gay is so because of their genes, then you have to prove it by testing everyone.
I hope you understand this is the only way to definatly say that no one is gay for life by choice. And that ideais what I got from your post.
If you meant this only in reference to people who may be geneticly gay, and not those who choose it, I would appreciate it if you specified that. Then my whole response couldbe dissregarded.

Hey, i am genetically predisposed to kill people...so you have to let me kill people...right?
Naw, I think your eye color would be a better reason. You could wear colored lenses if you wanted to...

I'm saying that if you want to say everyone who is gay, is so because of their genes (I don't believe any god makes it so, so your "God says so" argument isn't relevant to me, I want you to know that incase you decide to go the way alot of people I talk to go, and that is assume that I believe what they do). Anyway, if you want to say everyone who is gay is so because of their genes, then you have to prove it by testing everyone.
I hope you understand this is the only way to definatly say that no one is gay for life by choice. And that ideais what I got from your post.
If you meant this only in reference to people who may be geneticly gay, and not those who choose it, I would appreciate it if you specified that. Then my whole response couldbe dissregarded.

You cannot "be gay" by choice. You could act gay by choice, but you never choose who you are attracted to - that pretty much just happens.

There is no known "gay gene", however, that does not rule out the possibility of certain combinations yet unchecked could lead to an increased potential for it. However, myself, and a large number of gay people, say that it's simply not a choice; why would someone choose to be persecuted against, and to give up certain rights? If I could choose, I wouldn't choose to be gay, but I am. Is it how we're raised? We don't know. All we can say with a large degree of certainty is that it's not predominantly choice.

There is no known "gay gene", however, that does not rule out the possibility of certain combinations yet unchecked could lead to an increased potential for it. However, myself, and a large number of gay people, say that it's simply not a choice; why would someone choose to be persecuted against, and to give up certain rights? If I could choose, I wouldn't choose to be gay, but I am. Is it how we're raised? We don't know. All we can say with a large degree of certainty is that it's not predominantly choice.

Sexuality, like skin color, exists along a spectrum with no real discreet points except for whatever we term as the extremes. Thus, it would be very logical to posit that sexuality, like skin color, is influenced by many genetic factors, as well as some outside influences.

There is also a large amount of evidence that sexuality is partially determined by hormon balances in utero during development.

Pretty much all psychological data, however, leads to the conclusion that sexuality is pretty much set by age 3 or so.

There is a physilogical difference between gay men and straight men. Gay men have parts of their brain that look more like that of women. There's one part that's smaller in gays, and I believe the connection between the hemispheres is more robust. Similarly, the brains of lesbians are also halfway between male and female. It's at least partially a matter of brain structure.

I'm saying that if you want to say everyone who is gay, is so because of their genes (I don't believe any god makes it so, so your "God says so" argument isn't relevant to me, I want you to know that incase you decide to go the way alot of people I talk to go, and that is assume that I believe what they do). Anyway, if you want to say everyone who is gay is so because of their genes, then you have to prove it by testing everyone.
I hope you understand this is the only way to definatly say that no one is gay for life by choice. And that ideais what I got from your post.
If you meant this only in reference to people who may be geneticly gay, and not those who choose it, I would appreciate it if you specified that. Then my whole response couldbe dissregarded.

I'm a Buddhist by the way, so it's never my option to assume everyone is a Buddhist (I'd be an idiot).
Yes, obviously I mean the genetically predisposed. If it were found to be evident and true (which it isn't yet, despite what some here might say), are you saying you'd need a "genetic certificate" or something before you'd judge them? I'm not seeing your stance here. Why would you need anything if you don't care anyways?
I don't think my post was intended for you to respond. It's a partisan issue and you aren't taking any sides.
I like that though.

Frankly, who cares? Unless some fool decides to use gene screening - By the way, isn't there a possibility of inherent susceptibility of gene mutation if the genome is changed in the womb?

If my kids turn out gay, meh, I'll still love them. Genetic or not.

If Homosexuality is a genetic defect, then maybe someday it could be treated. I however DO NOT beleive it to be genetic. Well at least not any more so than any other sexual drive in humanity (Particularly men). A person might be more likely to have homosexual tendancies than another, but that doesn't mean that one needs to act on them. Most men have Polygamist fantasies (Wanting to have more than one woman), but because sociaty frowns on it, this practice is not openly practiced (Yes I say openly, because we all know how many men and women have affairs in their marriage). The fact is, that deep down inside almost all of us men are sexually perverse in some way shape or form by someone's standards. If it is genetic then maybe we can all one day be cured, till then we can either live in deprival or live in sin.

If Homosexuality is a genetic defect, then maybe someday it could be treated. I however DO NOT beleive it to be genetic. Well at least not any more so than any other sexual drive in humanity (Particularly men). A person might be more likely to have homosexual tendancies than another, but that doesn't mean that one needs to act on them. Most men have Polygamist fantasies (Wanting to have more than one woman), but because sociaty frowns on it, this practice is not openly practiced (Yes I say openly, because we all know how many men and women have affairs in their marriage). The fact is, that deep down inside almost all of us men are sexually perverse in some way shape or form by someone's standards. If it is genetic then maybe we can all one day be cured, till then we can either live in deprival or live in sin.

Never mind of course that homosexuality has a place in pretty much all social animals as a *useful* thing, not a "defect" that needs to be cured...

Never mind of course that homosexuality has a place in pretty much all social animals as a *useful* thing, not a "defect" that needs to be cured...

Oh, but don't you see the truth? Those gays are violating the law of Leviticus, and we cannot have that. :eek: ;)

It's funny how fast these threads lose momentum. Posts by people who say every little thing on their minds, and forget to answer the question that started the thread.
(Hint: It's either YES or NO).

Damn, I shoud've titled this one "God Is A Fag Today" or something. Sensationalism or vague titles works great on this forum!

Of course, this sort of assumes that we CARE what the bible thumpers think. I live in a house full of 'furry' nudists and I know quite well how we feel about it. Which is something along the line of telling people who don't like our lifestyle to go mind their own damned business.

I have a DAMNED good idea of what the Ranting Gryffin would (read that HAS) said about it.

If there is a "useful" function for homosexuality in an animal, I would really like to know what it is.

Logically, if Homosexuality is a genetic thing, then it has to be a very new, random mutation that isn't good for the evolution of the critter, or human. Think about it, it's impossible for a homosexual to pass on their genes. If the homo (I'm not trying to offend, it's just a lot shorter) is extra smart, super strong, whatever, then it's really a pity that they're oriented how they are, as their superior abilities will die with them. The only way a genetic good could come out of homos would be if all the morons/weaklings on earth were getting sexually confused and therefore wouldn't pass on their idiocy. ;)

Oh, but don't you see the truth? Those gays are violating the law of Leviticus, and we cannot have that. :eek: ;)


Buddy, you put your pants on just like everyone else...one leg at a time. You (and I've told others here the same thing before now) You have the right to YOUR opinion. Fine. Not a problem...but don't try to push it off on the rest of us, you ass.

If there is a "useful" function for homosexuality in an animal, I would really like to know what it is.

Logically, if Homosexuality is a genetic thing, then it has to be a very new, random mutation that isn't good for the evolution of the critter, or human. Think about it, it's impossible for a homosexual to pass on their genes. If the homo (I'm not trying to offend, it's just a lot shorter) is extra smart, super strong, whatever, then it's really a pity that they're oriented how they are, as their superior abilities will die with them. The only way a genetic good could come out of homos would be if all the morons/weaklings on earth were getting sexually confused and therefore wouldn't pass on their idiocy. ;)

Population control. Our species is waaaaaaaaaaaay over populated. And as always in nature, the simplest answer is quite likely the correct one. Remember, in nature, form follows function. Our forms are no longer the hardy, 'go climb glaciers for fun' forms they were a few generations ago. We are softer, weaker...less capable, physically now. And I'd bet all that factors in the somewhere.

If there is a "useful" function for homosexuality in an animal, I would really like to know what it is.

Logically, if Homosexuality is a genetic thing, then it has to be a very new, random mutation that isn't good for the evolution of the critter, or human. Think about it, it's impossible for a homosexual to pass on their genes. If the homo (I'm not trying to offend, it's just a lot shorter) is extra smart, super strong, whatever, then it's really a pity that they're oriented how they are, as their superior abilities will die with them. The only way a genetic good could come out of homos would be if all the morons/weaklings on earth were getting sexually confused and therefore wouldn't pass on their idiocy. ;)

And here is a person that knows very little about biology.

In social animals, passing on your own individual genes is not necessary as long as the pack/pride/whatever produces sufficient offspring. Those in your social group, especially offspring of siblings, also carry a large portion of a given animal's genetic code. The overall group is helped greatly by having non-breeding members tha contribute to resources and help take care of other offspring without the need to focus on their own offspring.

Learn a little biology before you make yourself look like an idiot.

There is no known "gay gene", however, that does not rule out the possibility of certain combinations yet unchecked could lead to an increased potential for it. However, myself, and a large number of gay people, say that it's simply not a choice; why would someone choose to be persecuted against, and to give up certain rights? If I could choose, I wouldn't choose to be gay, but I am. Is it how we're raised? We don't know. All we can say with a large degree of certainty is that it's not predominantly choice.

Nonsense. Do you not agree that you chose your religion as well? By your argument, why would anyone want to be jewish? They are not only persecuted now and all throughout history, but are straight out hated throughout the world. Funny how many jews there are still...

If I wanted to, I could easily choose to be gay. I could choose to date men and do whatever else homosexuals do. However, I do not. I choose to date women. I choose to have sex with women. Eventually, I will choose to marry a woman.

Never mind of course that homosexuality has a place in pretty much all social animals as a *useful* thing, not a "defect" that needs to be cured...

Just out of curiosity... how is homosexuality a useful thing in social animals? (I'm not going to get into whether animals fall in love or mate for pleasure or anything like that.) Sex is biologically for reproduction, and homosexuality doesn't aid in reproduction, so I wouldn't see it as a useful thing. (Unless, however, you're talking about an animal mounting another of the same sex as an assertion of dominance.) I wouldn't see it as a defect either, though, since it doesn't hurt the species. If it did, homosexual behavior would have either led to the species becoming extinct, or have been bred out as the species evolved.

Just out of curiosity... how is homosexuality a useful thing in social animals? (I'm not going to get into whether animals fall in love or mate for pleasure or anything like that.) Sex is biologically for reproduction, and homosexuality doesn't aid in reproduction, so I wouldn't see it as a useful thing. (Unless, however, you're talking about an animal mounting another of the same sex as an assertion of dominance.) I wouldn't see it as a defect either, though, since it doesn't hurt the species. If it did, homosexual behavior would have either led to the species becoming extinct, or have been bred out as the species evolved.

I spoke about homosexuality and altruism (non-breeding members increasing the reproductive potential of the group by providing resources and helping take care of the offspring) above.

I also want to address your erroneous point that "sex is biologically for reproduction." There are many reasons for sex, and in many higher order species reproduction is the main reason, but definitely not the only one. In social animals, sex is often used as a tension breaker - to avoid conflicts. It is also used to bind the group closer together, which increases their survival.

((Most of what we used to say was "an assertion of dominance" is actually sex for pleasure - people just didn't like to think that animals actually had homosexual members))

I'm a Buddhist by the way, so it's never my option to assume everyone is a Buddhist (I'd be an idiot).
Yes, obviously I mean the genetically predisposed. If it were found to be evident and true (which it isn't yet, despite what some here might say), are you saying you'd need a "genetic certificate" or something before you'd judge them? I'm not seeing your stance here. Why would you need anything if you don't care anyways?
I don't think my post was intended for you to respond. It's a partisan issue and you aren't taking any sides.
I like that though.

Um, the question asked if I would change my opnions, so I poped in, and needed clarification (Thaks for that too).
So, based on all you've said to me so far.
I don't think I'd have to say I wouldn;t change a thing in my ideology, since I already believe it can be, either choice or genetic.
And no need for a certificate, if you want to say everyone is gay geneticly, you'd have to prove it with scientific backing of testing everyone (Both gay or not) and have every result come up as genetic.

And yea, in this I can't exactly take sides. But I certianly think if it happened, not many people would believe it.

And here is a person that knows very little about biology.

In social animals, passing on your own individual genes is not necessary as long as the pack/pride/whatever produces sufficient offspring. Those in your social group, especially offspring of siblings, also carry a large portion of a given animal's genetic code. The overall group is helped greatly by having non-breeding members tha contribute to resources and help take care of other offspring without the need to focus on their own offspring.

Learn a little biology before you make yourself look like an idiot.

Thank you. Also, since homosexuality DOES occur in species that are known to mate for life, occurs IN NATURE, how then can it be 'un-natural'?

If I wanted to, I could easily choose to be gay. I could choose to date men and do whatever else homosexuals do. However, I do not. I choose to date women. I choose to have sex with women. Eventually, I will choose to marry a woman.

"Dating men and doing whatever else homosexuals do" would not actually make you homosexual, any more than me going to a synagogue with my Jewish friend would make me Jewish.

In order to be homosexual, you have to be exclusively sexually attracted to *only* members of the same gender. And we do not choose who we are attracted to. Of course, if you are actually attracted to members of both genders, you are *bisexual*, not hetero- or homo-sexual.

If Homosexuality is a genetic defect, then maybe someday it could be treated.

this is one of several very good reasons why talking about the "gay gene" is a huge problem. if it's genetic, then we can be eliminated through gene therapy. and you know they'd do it, too. watch how fast the christian right would warm up to stem cell research and human genetic experimentation if it meant wiping out queers.

and the other big problem: if there's a "gay gene" then you either have it or you don't
so how do you explain people who are neither "homo" nor "hetero"? people attracted to lots of sexes and genders?
are they only "part gay"? with half the gene?
or are they "super queer"?

and what about trans people and genderbenders? what gene do WE have?

the whole genetic argument is misguided, because it starts by going "why do gay people exist?"
and then the "cause" for this "deviation" can be found if we look hard enough.

to paraphrase the resident of 1600 pennsylvania ave:
"rarely is the question asked: why is there straight people?"
cuz i got news for you: queer folks can still reproduce. you obviously don't NEED to be exclusively attracted to the "opposite sex" to make babies. we just might not do it quite as incessantly as the hets.
so why do straight people exist, if they aren't neccesary to carry on the species?

that seems like an absurd question right?
what if i pointed to a spot on a chromosome and said "see, that's what leads to heterosexual desire!"
that'd be ridiculous, right?
and so if i did the same for a "gay gene," that would be absurd too, right?

Nonsense. Do you not agree that you chose your religion as well? By your argument, why would anyone want to be jewish? They are not only persecuted now and all throughout history, but are straight out hated throughout the world. Funny how many jews there are still...

If I wanted to, I could easily choose to be gay. I could choose to date men and do whatever else homosexuals do. However, I do not. I choose to date women. I choose to have sex with women. Eventually, I will choose to marry a woman.

Whether it's genetic or not, someone's else's love life is THIER love life. As long as love is present, the gender of the loved one doesn't matter.

that seems like an absurd question right?
what if i pointed to a spot on a chromosome and said "see, that's what leads to heterosexual desire!"
that'd be ridiculous, right?
and so if i did the same for a "gay gene," that would be absurd too, right?

The idea of a single "gay" or "straight" gene is pretty absurd. However, the idea that sexuality as it exists along a spectrum, is partially determined by several genetic factors, is not absurd in the least.

"Dating men and doing whatever else homosexuals do" would not actually make you homosexual, any more than me going to a synagogue with my Jewish friend would make me Jewish.

In order to be homosexual, you have to be exclusively sexually attracted to *only* members of the same gender. And we do not choose who we are attracted to. Of course, if you are actually attracted to members of both genders, you are *bisexual*, not hetero- or homo-sexual.

Ok, now in your defense, prove to me that you are only attracted to men, or women for that matter. Prove to me that you're not simply making that up. Do you see why this will never be resolved? Do you at least see the other viewpoint?

Ok, now in your defense, prove to me that you are only attracted to men, or women for that matter. Prove to me that you're not simply making that up. Do you see why this will never be resolved? Do you at least see the other viewpoint?

Personally, I am not only attracted to men, or women for that matter. I am nearly always attracted to men, but am occasionally attracted to women. This makes me bisexual.

What other viewpoint? The idiotic viewpoint that sexuality is a choice? That only holds up if you think that the following animals, among others, are capable of rational choice:

penguins
rats
mice
dolphins
every type of ape and monkey
giraffes
elephants
geese
swans
hummingbirds
woodpeckers
dogs
cats
cattle
goats
sheep
guinea pigs
wales
walruses
deer
and so on and so on and so on.

Now, if your assertion is that who you actually have sex with is a choice, that would be correct. But who you are attracted to is not, plain and simple.

Whether it's genetic or not, someone's else's love life is THIER love life. As long as love is present, the gender of the loved one doesn't matter.

MSL, I have no problem accepting the fact that there are gays out there any more than I have accepting the fact that there are people out there who think eating meat is "mean" or whatever. What I have a problem with are these gays demanding marriage and the benefits that come with it.

What if I love my cat? Prove to me that there isn't love between me and my cat. Now, I want to marry my cat. Now, I want to marry my chair. Don't tell me what love is! Don't define my emotions! I love this chair.

I think that is a little harsh. Nobody knows what really makes anyone gay. Maybe there is a gene for it but I don't know I'm not a biologist. I don't know why all you gay rights people have to insist that it is not a choice and that is the complete and total answer and everything else is evil.. To me it sounds like you are implying that while homosexuality may be wrong but that don't blame homosexuals because it is not their fault. I don't care if it is a choice or not, it doesn't bother me a bit either way. However I tend to think it is also a product of your surroundings at least partly. Who here didn't know a girl or two in high school who pretended to be bi or lesbian for a while just to be cool? Look at ancient greece every body was doing little boys in the butt, read the Symposium by plato or watch Alexander to see what I mean. Did all these Greeks carry the gay gene? I kind of doubt it.
Just have to say I didn’t know anyone that faked it.

I mean why? Lol make you cool … I come from a Roman Catholic area (to the point it is saturated) the people I did know that were homosexual had to take more crap from those bastards

I know and am friends with gay people but tell you what it didn’t make them popular … the religious people saw to that

Personally, I am not only attracted to men, or women for that matter. I am nearly always attracted to men, but am occasionally attracted to women. This makes me bisexual.

What other viewpoint? The idiotic viewpoint that sexuality is a choice? That only holds up if you think that the following animals, among others, are capable of rational choice:

(long list)

Now, if your assertion is that who you actually have sex with is a choice, that would be correct. But who you are attracted to is not, plain and simple.

Pretend I'm a lawmaker. I'm willing to give gays the right to marriage and everything else if you can prove to me that it's not a choice. Do it. Frankly, you can't. You cannot prove that it's a choice any more than I can prove it's not. However I can give logical examples as to why it's not while your argument is "trust me" and then you point to animals humping each other as an example. This is why nothing will ever come of this argument, and why this nation will stay the same as it is now until more facts come out or public opinion changes greatly.

I know and am friends with gay people but tell you what it didn’t make them popular … the religious people saw to that

Nonsense...it's the same with the "punk" movement in highschools these days. Kids wearing crazy clothes and crazy jewelry to be "different" when in reality they all look the same.

Want to be different? Be gay! Why not?

MSL, I have no problem accepting the fact that there are gays out there any more than I have accepting the fact that there are people out there who think eating meat is "mean" or whatever. What I have a problem with are these gays demanding marriage and the benefits that come with it.

What if I love my cat? Prove to me that there isn't love between me and my cat. Now, I want to marry my cat. Now, I want to marry my chair. Don't tell me what love is! Don't define my emotions! I love this chair.
The whole concenting adults thing throws a wrench in that logic

And most “Gay” rights people want exactly that … the rights … they couldn’t care less about the religious ceremony

IF, and only IF, it was 100% proven that homosexuality is genetic, not by choice, then I would view homosexuals just like victims of Alzheimers, or any other genetic disease: with compassion. I would accept their homosexuality, and consider it normal for them. And of course I would also feel very bad for them, as they were punished by G-d even before they were born.

Nonsense...it's the same with the "punk" movement in highschools these days. Kids wearing crazy clothes and crazy jewelry to be "different" when in reality they all look the same.

Want to be different? Be gay! Why not?
You choose to see it that way … it was asked who didn’t know someone that wasn’t gay to be popular

4 years out of high school all my gay friends are still gay … as they had been since before high school

Nonsense...it's the same with the "punk" movement in highschools these days. Kids wearing crazy clothes and crazy jewelry to be "different" when in reality they all look the same.

Want to be different? Be gay! Why not?
I agree with you that homosexuality is much like the punk movement.

IF, and only IF, it was 100% proven that homosexuality is genetic, not by choice, then I would view homosexuals just like victims of Alzheimers, or any other genetic disease: with compassion. I would accept their homosexuality, and consider it normal for them. And of course I would also feel very bad for them, as they were punished by G-d even before they were born.


Lol and if it was genetic it would *have* to mean that god meant for people to be gay is that not amazing

You choose to see it that way … it was asked who didn’t know someone that wasn’t gay to be popular

4 years out of high school all my gay friends are still gay … as they had been since before high school
Yes, but we never said that the gay movement is only in high school. people try it in high school, decide they like feeling different and special, and continue it through their later life.

MSL, I have no problem accepting the fact that there are gays out there any more than I have accepting the fact that there are people out there who think eating meat is "mean" or whatever. What I have a problem with are these gays demanding marriage and the benefits that come with it.

What if I love my cat? Prove to me that there isn't love between me and my cat. Now, I want to marry my cat. Now, I want to marry my chair. Don't tell me what love is! Don't define my emotions! I love this chair.

Neither your cat nor your chair can provide informed consent and sign a contract. Your argument is idiotic. Two competent homosexuals who have chosen to live as a single entity should receive the same legal protection as two heterosexuals who have chosen to live as a single entity. Your cat and your chair are not competent to enter into such a legal construct.

Yes, but we never said that the gay movement is only in high school. people try it in high school, decide they like feeling different and special, and continue it through their later life.
Lol sure put up with all that shit for the fun of it lol

For those who say that their God doesn't make anyone gay... That it's a just a choice, would you even change your mind on the issue if sufficient evidence were produced suddenlyshowing that there is a definite genetic conncection?
I think most would still insist that "the earth is flat", so to speak.
Would you accept that you have had the wrong opinion or just stick with your prejudices?
It doesn't matter if there is a "genetic connection."

You still choose whether to enter into a relationship with another human being, or not.

Neither your cat nor your chair can provide informed consent and sign a contract. Your argument is idiotic. Two competent homosexuals who have chosen to live as a single entity should receive the same legal protection as two heterosexuals who have chosen to live as a single entity. Your cat and your chair are not competent to enter into such a legal construct.
lol read my post :) same consenting adult arguement lol

Personally, I am not only attracted to men, or women for that matter. I am nearly always attracted to men, but am occasionally attracted to women. This makes me bisexual.

What other viewpoint? The idiotic viewpoint that sexuality is a choice? That only holds up if you think that the following animals, among others, are capable of rational choice:

penguins
rats
mice
dolphins
every type of ape and monkey
giraffes
elephants
geese
swans
hummingbirds
woodpeckers
dogs
cats
cattle
goats
sheep
guinea pigs
wales
walruses
deer
and so on and so on and so on.

Now, if your assertion is that who you actually have sex with is a choice, that would be correct. But who you are attracted to is not, plain and simple.

How in the HELL did your blood-line make it this far without being killed off and removed from the gene-pool?

Lol sure put up with all that shit for the fun of it lol
Yes, not only fun, but you like feeling sorry for yourselves and feel like outcasts.

It doesn't matter if there is a "genetic connection."

You still choose whether to enter into a relationship with another human being, or not.
Yeah but it would have meant that there was a plan for people to be gay … for some justification

Pretend I'm a lawmaker. I'm willing to give gays the right to marriage and everything else if you can prove to me that it's not a choice. Do it. Frankly, you can't. You cannot prove that it's a choice any more than I can prove it's not. However I can give logical examples as to why it's not while your argument is "trust me" and then you point to animals humping each other as an example. This is why nothing will ever come of this argument, and why this nation will stay the same as it is now until more facts come out or public opinion changes greatly.

Pretend you're a lawmaker. Why does the government sanction marriage? The reasons are basically because of what comes along with two people deciding to entwine their lives. These protections are equally necessary for heterosexual and homosexual couples. You have no reason to not provide them to both.

Meanwhile, I can demonstrate all sorts of influences on sexuality, as well as the fact that sexuality is generally determined by *age 3*.

And, if you think it is a choice, you must tell me the exact point at which you decided to be attracted to X gender. Since there is no such point, and you (as well as every other human being) simply find yourself attracted to this person and not to that one, you have *no* argument whatsoever that it is a choice.

So 2 teenagers under the age of 18, cannot be gay?

I agree with you that homosexuality is much like the punk movement.

All those crazy punk elephants.

Yes, not only fun, but you like feeling sorry for yourselves and feel like outcasts.
Oh wow suddenly got very personal with all those “you’s”
What makes u think I am gay

Or even what sex I am lol

So 2 teenagers under the age of 18, cannot be gay?
No they cant be married … look at the quote it was about gay marriage … might want to read before posting

And for the last time, just because animals can have gay sex, doesn't mean it's genetic. Doesn't mean it's right. Doesn't mean anything, except that animals can have gay sex.

Since there is no such point, and you (as well as every other human being) simply find yourself attracted to this person and not to that one, you have *no* argument whatsoever that it is a choice.

Somewhere along these lines I said that neither of us has a real argument. Being that it's late, I'm going to leave it at that. You're not going to change my beliefs, I'm not going to change your's, and we're both going to think that the other is ignorant, stupid, or whatever.

Oh wow suddenly got very personal with all those “you’s”
What makes u think I am gay

Or even what sex I am lol
I thought you said "i" in your last post. My apologies.

How in the HELL did your blood-line make it this far without being killed off and removed from the gene-pool?

What in the hell does that mean, exactly?

Are you upset that I have actually studied the biology of the situation/

Are you upset that I use the actual meanings of words rather than some idiotic gay=buttsex connotation?

Are you upset that I happen to occasionally be attracted to members of the same gender, much like most mammals?

Yeah but it would have meant that there was a plan for people to be gay … for some justification
What?

Fags suck and should be curb stomped with great alarcity before they propagate.

Somewhere along these lines I said that neither of us has a real argument. Being that it's late, I'm going to leave it at that. You're not going to change my beliefs, I'm not going to change your's, and we're both going to think that the other is ignorant, stupid, or whatever.

Of course, I have biology on my side, all you have is "I said so!!!!!!!!!!"

Fags suck and should be curb stomped with great alarcity before they propagate.
That's one way to put it.

Fags suck and should be curb stomped with great alarcity before they propagate.

How do they propogate?

It seems a moot point whether it's genetic or not. I'm going to name someone right now, mostly because he has to be named at some point in every thread on this board.... also because it's relevant this time (often it is not). That's right: Hitler. He definately thought homosexuality was genetic, and he put homosexuals in concentration camps along with the Jews and the mentally disabled (Piece of trivia: they had to wear pink triangles, like the Jews' stars of David). So is proven to be Genetic it makes no difference. Genetic screening and the like would just become much easier strategies if you wanted to find out who was different.
Besides, as someone said earlier: what if someone is genetically predisposed to kill? Most of us would say that person cannot be allowed to kill, and the fact is that your genes do not force you to kill, steal, or have sex with anyone: man or woman. They simply make you want to (assuming the genetic theory is correct), and the fact is that some people consider homosexual behaviour to be a sin. It makes no difference, logically, whether it's genetic, a result of environment, or if it's purely choice.

What in the hell does that mean, exactly?

Are you upset that I happen to occasionally be attracted to members of the same gender, much like most mammals?


:upyours:


Dempublicents :sniper:

And for the last time, just because animals can have gay sex, doesn't mean it's genetic.

However, the fact that most higher order animals have a sexual orientation (often other than heterosexual), is *extremely* good evidence that it is not a choice.

Anyway, all I came on these forums to say, is that if it was proven that gays are genetic, i would look at them with compassion, and not dislike and disgust.

For those who say that their God doesn't make anyone gay... That it's a just a choice, would you even change your mind on the issue if sufficient evidence were produced suddenlyshowing that there is a definite genetic conncection?
I think most would still insist that "the earth is flat", so to speak.
Would you accept that you have had the wrong opinion or just stick with your prejudices?
I'd probably change my mind.

If science proved that there was a God and he did create the earth and everything written in the Bible is 100% accurate, would you accept Jesus as your savior and devoutly practice Christianity?

:upyours:

Dempublicents :sniper:

*still wondering why I am being attacked for being logical.*

Lol and if it was genetic it would *have* to mean that god meant for people to be gay is that not amazing

This 'person' is one of those assholes who believes, apparently, that if you don't view the world in the exact same way he/she/it does, then you are automatically damned.

He/she/it is a total MORON.

Don't bother. This party's IQ is around a -400, so what's the point in wasting our time any further?

its only not a choice if your a completely retarded.

Every adult has the ability to "bugger" his buddy or not.

Queers will burn in hell.


Fag... :mp5:

It seems a moot point whether it's genetic or not. I'm going to name someone right now, mostly because he has to be named at some point in every thread on this board.... also because it's relevant this time (often it is not). That's right: Hitler. He definately thought homosexuality was genetic, and he put homosexuals in concentration camps along with the Jews and the mentally disabled (Piece of trivia: they had to wear pink triangles, like the Jews' stars of David). So is proven to be Genetic it makes no difference. Genetic screening and the like would just become much easier strategies if you wanted to find out who was different.
Besides, as someone said earlier: what if someone is genetically predisposed to kill? Most of us would say that person cannot be allowed to kill, and the fact is that your genes do not force you to kill, steal, or have sex with anyone: man or woman. They simply make you want to (assuming the genetic theory is correct), and the fact is that some people consider homosexual behaviour to be a sin. It makes no difference, logically, whether it's genetic, a result of environment, or if it's purely choice.
Ok, last thing. Just because Hitler believed in something, doesn't make it wrong. He believed that the moon orbits the Earth, for example.

Of course, I have biology on my side, all you have is "I said so!!!!!!!!!!"

Nonsense...what biology do you have that the experts don't?

*rolls eyes*

"and he put homosexuals in concentration camps along the mentally disabled "

Why not, being queer is essentially the same thing.

However, the fact that most higher order animals have a sexual orientation (often other than heterosexual), is *extremely* good evidence that it is not a choice.
Ehhh for most anti homosexual people it seems like no amount of proof will overcome the “icky ness” which is what it usually boils down to

American voters defeated the Pro-queer crowd by a margin of 3 to 1 in the last election.

The Fag agenda lost every issue it put up for a vote.

Nonsense...what biology do you have that the experts don't?

*rolls eyes*

Newsflash: The experts agree that it isn't a choice.

Unless, of course, psychologists and biologists aren't *experts* in your book.

"and he put homosexuals in concentration camps along the mentally disabled "

Why not, being queer is essentially the same thing.
along with being in-tolerent

However, the fact that most higher order animals have a sexual orientation (often other than heterosexual), is *extremely* good evidence that it is not a choice.
You should not compare humans to other animals, which do not possess the same level of intelligence. Humans are unique in their ability to choose (the symbolism of "free will").

Ehhh for most anti homosexual people it seems like no amount of proof will overcome the “icky ness” which is what it usually boils down to

Yeah, well, no one ever said that the majority of people could actually be appealed to with logic.

American voters defeated the Pro-queer crowd by a margin of 3 to 1 in the last election.

The Fag agenda lost every issue it put up for a vote.
Um individual states … minnesota did not vote on such thing … not exactly representative

You got the southern vote ;)

Yeah, well, no one ever said that the majority of people could actually be appealed to with logic.
Sickening isent it … personally the supreme lack of logic is more “icky” to me

Neither your cat nor your chair can provide informed consent and sign a contract. Your argument is idiotic. Two competent homosexuals who have chosen to live as a single entity should receive the same legal protection as two heterosexuals who have chosen to live as a single entity. Your cat and your chair are not competent to enter into such a legal construct.

See my other post to the 'lol' comment. Told him/her the same thing...don't even bother, this 'person' is NOT worth getting your blood pressure up over. Ignore him/her/it's comments and let's just those of us who possess a
functional mind continue the convo.

Yeah, well, no one ever said that the majority of people could actually be appealed to with logic.

Most people can be reasoned with. The problem is only old people vote. If young people voted the way old people did gay marriage would be the law of the land,

You should not compare humans to other animals, which do not possess the same level of intelligence. Humans are unique in their ability to choose (the symbolism of "free will").

Animals can choose their partners, and do.

However, we do not choose who we are attracted to. You don't walk into a room and look around and say "I feel like only looking at boobies tonight, I'm not going to be attracted to any guys." If you happen to be someone who is most often attracted to men, you will see attractive men. If you happen to be someone who is most often attracted to women, you will see attractive women. If you are some degree of bisexual, you may see members of both genders that you find attractive.

The choice only comes in with choosing the actual person that you pursue and possibly have sex with.

This is ludicrious. Whether or not homosexuality is a choice is irrelevant. Human beings *choose* whether to enter into sexual or partnership relationships with other human beings.

Period.

See my other post to the 'lol' comment. Told him/her the same thing...don't even bother, this 'person' is NOT worth getting your blood pressure up over. Ignore him/her/it's comments and let's just those of us who possess a
functional mind continue the convo.

And yet I believe that you attacked me for some unknown reason just a few posts ago.

The choice only comes in with choosing the actual person that you pursue and possibly have sex with.
Agreed.

(Though I may disagree on the animal part.)

Most people can be reasoned with. The problem is only old people vote. If young people voted the way old people did gay marriage would be the law of the land,
We are working on the young vote up here … it is working too (problem is we have a LOT of old farmers)

Lol like in my home town … 1000 full time people (doubles when the college is in session … not my school but anyways) the new mayor got elected by actually hanging out with the kids

Got them to vote in record number
26 year old mayor in a town that is usually just an old farm town

What in the hell does that mean, exactly?

Are you upset that I have actually studied the biology of the situation/

Are you upset that I use the actual meanings of words rather than some idiotic gay=buttsex connotation?

Are you upset that I happen to occasionally be attracted to members of the same gender, much like most mammals?


But the inference that gay sexuality automatically means bestility was way out of line.

I'd probably change my mind.

If science proved that there was a God and he did create the earth and everything written in the Bible is 100% accurate, would you accept Jesus as your savior and devoutly practice Christianity?

No, at that point everyone should stop being a Christian, because Christianity would cease to be a faith. There's no point in believing in something if you know it's real. Do you believe in the chair you're sitting on. Of course not, it's just there.

But the inference that gay sexuality automatically means bestility was way out of line.

I never made any such inference.

I simply pointed out that unless you believe human beings are aliens from outer space, the fact that animals exhibit homosexual behavior demonstrates that alternate sexualities are natural. And if someone believes that homosexuality is a choice, they must believe that every animal that demonstrates sexual orientation is likewise capable of choice.

This is ludicrious. Whether or not homosexuality is a choice is irrelevant. Human beings *choose* whether to enter into sexual or partnership relationships with other human beings.

Period.

I couldn't agree more. And all such relationships should be recognised and accorded the same worth.

There is no known "gay gene", however, that does not rule out the possibility of certain combinations yet unchecked could lead to an increased potential for it. However, myself, and a large number of gay people, say that it's simply not a choice; why would someone choose to be persecuted against, and to give up certain rights? If I could choose, I wouldn't choose to be gay, but I am. Is it how we're raised? We don't know. All we can say with a large degree of certainty is that it's not predominantly choice.

No agenda here. Just a thought for consideration:

Many things in life don't seem to be choices at the conscious level, yet are still choices made at some level of our beings. Many times we are completely unaware of our own deeper motivations. How many times have you done something, then afterwards said to yourself, "What the hell made me do THAT???" You still chose it on some level, but you were unaware you'd chosen it.

How many shy people would say they "choose" to be shy? Not many, yet their behaviour is, in fact, the result of choices they've made. These choices may seem to have nothing to do with their shyness; their choices may be beliefs about themselves, paradigms, beliefs about others, etc.. Yet they have still made conscious choices at one level, which combine at another level and lead to certain behavioural characteristics.

My point is merely to offer up another *possible* explanation for why homosexuality may not seem to be a choice -- without linking it to a genetic trait. Sometimes our "choices" don't feel like things we've chosen at all.

No, at that point everyone should stop being a Christian, because Christianity would cease to be a faith. There's no point in believing in something if you know it's real. Do you believe in the chair you're sitting on. Of course not, it's just there.
For me, god has already been made real, and that has rendered every organized religion redundant.

Go god!

I couldn't agree more. And all such relationships should be recognised and accorded the same worth.
Exactly because being strait is obviously a choice

And since they are both choices …

:)

good thinking

Agreed.

Then the idea that homo-, hetero-, bi- sexuality is a choice is silly. The act of pursuing a relationship is always a choice, regardless of sexual orientation, but the orientation itself is not.

(Though I may disagree on the animal part.)

You would disagree that animals often choose between one mate or the other?

When a female Bonobos chimp has the option of a several mates, and goes with one of them, that is not a choice?

I couldn't agree more. And all such relationships should be recognised and accorded the same worth.
Absolutely.

I'm very pleased that such equality is built into the Canadian constitution.

its only not a choice if your a completely retarded.

Every adult has the ability to "bugger" his buddy or not.

Queers will burn in hell.


Fag... :mp5:

As will bigots. Read the bible, moron.

Ok, last thing. Just because Hitler believed in something, doesn't make it wrong. He believed that the moon orbits the Earth, for example.
Did I say he was wrong? Did I make an argument? No. I simply stated that homosexuality being genetic does not mean that people will change their stances on it. I'm simply unaware of another historical example that fits this scenario. Suggestion: Read what is written before commenting on it.

"and he put homosexuals in concentration camps along the mentally disabled "

Why not, being queer is essentially the same thing.
I assume you're quoting me, so do it properly. Click on "Quote" underneath my post, edit the quotation so only the pertinent section remains and do not alter what I said without indicating it. For example, you left out "the Jews and", so indicate that. It's not difficult, just "...". I do not appreciate being mis-quoted.

Absolutely.

I'm very pleased that such equality is built into the Canadian constitution.
Agreed … for some things we got a good role model to the north (don’t agree with everything but no one does)

Then the idea that homo-, hetero-, bi- sexuality is a choice is silly. The act of pursuing a relationship is always a choice, regardless of sexual orientation, but the orientation itself is not.
The argument is silly. It's a state of consciousness. What causes it is irrevelant, as much as what causes sadness or happiness.

You would disagree that animals often choose between one mate or the other?

When a female Bonobos chimp has the option of a several mates, and goes with one of them, that is not a choice?
I would not disagree that animals choose between one mate and another, but I also would not attribute to them human motivations for their choices.

You should not compare humans to other animals, which do not possess the same level of intelligence. Humans are unique in their ability to choose (the symbolism of "free will").


There is documented, scientific evidence that elephants and several species of whale are just as, if not more than, intelligent as any human. It's more a matter of deciphering THEIR forms of communication and language than whether or not they have it. Both groups have vocalizations that require sensitive equipment for a human to hear it...and both have been evolving for a LOT longer than we have.

Once more, you have shown your lack of contact with the real world.

You're Genetically Gay, Now What?

For those who say that their God doesn't make anyone gay... That it's a just a choice, would you even change your mind on the issue if sufficient evidence were produced suddenlyshowing that there is a definite genetic conncection?
I think most would still insist that "the earth is flat", so to speak.
Would you accept that you have had the wrong opinion or just stick with your prejudices?


The problem with this question is that you assume that such evidence can be found. I am an astute believer that there is nothing genetic about being gay, and that it is a state brought to a person by a ungodly spirit. It is stated in the bible that homosexuality is a sin, but by no means should we hate the person, and by no means do I hate homosexuals. So my answer is no I would not change my mind if evidence were brought up because there is none and never will there be sufficient to prove the theory that there is a genetic connection. I stand by the fact that I hold no prejudice against homosexuals, I just have my own beliefs. (not pressing my beliefs on anyone, just answering)

There is documented, scientific evidence that elephants and several species of whale are just as, if not more than, intelligent as any human. It's more a matter of deciphering THEIR forms of communication and language than whether or not they have it. Both groups have vocalizations that require sensitive equipment for a human to hear it...and both have been evolving for a LOT longer than we have.

Once more, you have shown your lack of contact with the real world.
Whatever their "level of intelligence", it is not human intelligence.

And yet I believe that you attacked me for some unknown reason just a few posts ago.

YOU I merely advise that the dude was an idiot and not to waste your breath.

The argument is silly. It's a state of consciousness. What causes it is irrevelant, as much as what causes sadness or happiness.

It is relevant, as it is part of biology, and because the bigots make it relevant by using silly arguments. And it is not a "state of mind" per se, as one does not really switch between different sexualities, as one does between emotions.

I would not disagree that animals choose between one mate and another, but I also would not attribute to them human motivations for their choices.

Nor would I, but it is choice nonetheless, chosen for *some* reason or other.

The problem with this question is that you assume that such evidence can be found. I am an astute believer that there is nothing genetic about being gay, and that it is a state brought to a person by a ungodly spirit. It is stated in the bible that homosexuality is a sin, but by no means should we hate the person, and by no means do I hate homosexuals. So my answer is no I would not change my mind if evidence were brought up because there is none and never will there be sufficient to prove the theory that there is a genetic connection. I stand by the fact that I hold no prejudice against homosexuals, I just have my own beliefs. (not pressing my beliefs on anyone, just answering)
So you're refusing to answer a question about a hypothetical situation because the hypothetical situation won't happen? Well why bother responding? Anyway, that bit about the ungodly spirit: I guess it's still not a choice than... so that's the unexpected third option. Neat.

I never made any such inference.

I simply pointed out that unless you believe human beings are aliens from outer space, the fact that animals exhibit homosexual behavior demonstrates that alternate sexualities are natural. And if someone believes that homosexuality is a choice, they must believe that every animal that demonstrates sexual orientation is likewise capable of choice.

Peace?

It is relevant, as it is part of biology, and because the bigots make it relevant by using silly arguments. And it is not a "state of mind" per se, as one does not really switch between different sexualities, as one does between emotions.
Not all states of mind can be symbolised in switches. I, for instance, have been of a state of mind to recognize god all my life.

Nor would I, but it is choice nonetheless, chosen for *some* reason or other.
The point with this is that we *are* dealing with human beings, with human motivations.

To compare an animals choices to man's makes both redundant.

EDIT: you have no control group.

The point with this is that we *are* dealing with human beings, with human motivations.

To compare an animals choices to man's makes both redundant.
Rather then motivational comparison I think the intended effect is “why does it exist in something that wasn’t given the freedom of choice ‘choice’ unless god wanted it”

If I might ask ...

When you say, "gay", you are obviously refering to homosexuality, but how do you define it? Is it the attraction to people of the same sex, or a homosexal someone that engages in sex acts with a person of the same sex?

My initial reaction is that genetics is only a predisposition. People can have a genetic predisposition toward addictive behaviours, but that doesn't make them addicts. Taking to the bottle, or the needle, or to the donut shoppe in excess is what actually makes them an addict. If I were genetically homosexual, then I would still have to choose my actions.

So to ask a further clarifying question, is the matter of genetics really relevent?

Rather then motivational comparison I think the intended effect is “why does it exist in something that wasn’t given the freedom of choice ‘choice’ unless god wanted it”
I am not a Christian; my idea of god is not one of an intelligent being, so I'm not going to get into defending that argument.

Peace?

=)

Whatever their "level of intelligence", it is not human intelligence.

Because they don't kill others of thier own kind off by the billions, habitually kill and persecute those who believe or live differently than themselves, they do not habitually commit murder just because they CAN. Who in the HELL would want to be a member of the human race if they had another choice?

Who would be that stupid? We are the singlemost destructive creatures on this planet, we're better at murder than any one other skill. Why are you 'bragging' about being a human.

I've been deeply ashamed of my species for most of my life, for reasons that have not got a damned thing to do with my sexuality! If you're going to get on a band wagon to preach, go for world peace. It makes more sense.

The point with this is that we *are* dealing with human beings, with human motivations.

To compare an animals choices to man's makes both redundant.

EDIT: you have no control group.

I wasn't comparing choices. I was comparing orientation, which we have both agreed is not a choice.

Not all states of mind can be symbolised in switches. I, for instance, have been of a state of mind to recognize god all my life.

However, it would be very possible (were you convinced somehow) to change that state of mind.

My initial reaction is that genetics is only a predisposition. People can have a genetic predisposition toward addictive behaviours, but that doesn't make them addicts. Taking to the bottle, or the needle, or to the donut shoppe in excess is what actually makes them an addict. If I were genetically homosexual, then I would still have to choose my actions.

So to ask a further clarifying question, is the matter of genetics really relevent?
Well done.

G2g

If the cause is irrelevant, then the whole discussion is irrelevant (I would agree, but those on the other side are pains in the ass).

Saying "You! Homosexuals! Refrain from sex! And You! Heterosexuals! Have
sex!" is like saying "You! People who like chocolate! Stop eating! And You! People who like vanilla! Go ahead and eat!"

Because they don't kill others of thier own kind off by the billions, habitually kill and persecute those who believe or live differently than themselves, they do not habitually commit murder just because they CAN. Who in the HELL would want to be a member of the human race if they had another choice?

Who would be that stupid? We are the singlemost destructive creatures on this planet, we're better at murder than any one other skill. Why are you 'bragging' about being a human.

I've been deeply ashamed of my species for most of my life, for reasons that have not got a damned thing to do with my sexuality! If you're going to get on a band wagon to preach, go for world peace. It makes more sense.
I too have felt a shame associated with being human --most notably, sitting on a playground swing contemplating the first time I learned about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and what that anniversary meant to my Asian-American friends.

Human intelligence is very well defined in Genesis, and other creation myths. It is symbolized in the ability to assign meaning and order to the universe around us. Nature is chaos; humanity is order and "intelligence". It is the only thing we properly should take pride in; we amongst all of nature's animals.

However, it would be very possible (were you convinced somehow) to change that state of mind.
Even during the period of my life when I wholly considered myself to be an atheist, I (now) recognize that I held onto my belief in a god.

If the cause is irrelevant, then the whole discussion is irrelevant (I would agree, but those on the other side are pains in the ass).

Saying "You! Homosexuals! Refrain from sex! And You! Heterosexuals! Have
sex!" is like saying "You! People who like chocolate! Stop eating! And You! People who like vanilla! Go ahead and eat!"
LOL!

It is.

Human intelligence is very well defined in Genesis, and other creation myths. It is symbolized in the ability to assign meaning and order to the universe around us. Nature is chaos; humanity is order and "intelligence". It is the only thing we properly should take pride in; we amongst all of nature's animals.

And yet knowledge is used to represent humankind's fall from God (at least in Genesis). So, by that right, we should take pride in falling from God (at least from a fundamentalist Christian/Jewish viewpoint)?

So you're refusing to answer a question about a hypothetical situation because the hypothetical situation won't happen? Well why bother responding? Anyway, that bit about the ungodly spirit: I guess it's still not a choice than... so that's the unexpected third option. Neat.

actually if you read my statement i state that my answer tp the question as being no. My explanation of my answer states that the hypothetical situation could not exist. In regards to the ungodly spirit, yes it is still a choice...the person allows the spirit to take hold of them...by the way they live their life

Fags suck and should be curb stomped with great alarcity before they propagate.
How come I only see idiots like this on this side, but I never hear anyone who's gay saying they should kill your straight babies and your straight dog for being what they are?
Do you believe Jesus wants you to do this, or is your religion Devine Hatred?
Or are you pissed that these Fags keep teasing you with their luscious bottoms?
I hear some repression going on here...

How come I only see idiots like this on this side, but I never hear anyone who's gay saying they should kill your straight babies and your straight dog for being what they are?
Do you believe Jesus wants you to do this, or is your religion Devine Hatred?
Or are you pissed that these Fags keep teasing you with their luscious bottoms?
I hear some repression going on here...
Yeah while there were an idiot … but we have to realize this is probably a puppet and people being an idiots

actually if you read my statement i state that my answer tp the question as being no. My explanation of my answer states that the hypothetical situation could not exist. In regards to the ungodly spirit, yes it is still a choice...the person allows the spirit to take hold of them...by the way they live their life

Considering that sexuality is pretty much set in stone by age three, those evil spirits sure do get an early start. Of course, three year olds don't have much say so in how they live their live..... *head explodey*

If the cause is irrelevant, then the whole discussion is irrelevant (I would agree, but those on the other side are pains in the ass).

Saying "You! Homosexuals! Refrain from sex! And You! Heterosexuals! Have
sex!" is like saying "You! People who like chocolate! Stop eating! And You! People who like vanilla! Go ahead and eat!"

Don't get me wrong. It is an interesting question. If we postulate that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition, then we have to ask how it gets propogated, if homosexual predisposition keeps one from procreating. True, homosexual people have had heterosexual relationships, often for societal reasons, but biologically speaking, but that has nothing to do with the genetic question.

Then we have to look at the implications regarding Darwinism. If homosexual predisposition is genetic, then we have to acertain how it fits into the development of the species. Moderation of overcrowding could count, if you believe we have developed this genetic predisposition in order to combat starvation, but it seems that starvation does a pretty good job of reducing the surplus population, as does disease. As a matter of fact, the majority of factors that reduce population are generally classified as "bad things", but let's not go there just now.

The cause is a fascinating discussion, but we still have yet to state with any certainty that predisposition is destiny. Am I gay because of my genes, or am I gay because of who's jeans I choose to get into?

Humanity is geneticly homosexual but we suport heterosexual so its the whole genetics vs. environment thing.. I mean how can we see how much of our actions are composed of our environment and how much our genes. We are far from descovering that unless someone knows of a top secerity government file I can study. :D

Don't get me wrong. It is an interesting question. If we postulate that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition, then we have to ask how it gets propogated, if homosexual predisposition keeps one from procreating. True, homosexual people have had heterosexual relationships, often for societal reasons, but biologically speaking, but that has nothing to do with the genetic question.

Then we have to look at the implications regarding Darwinism. If homosexual predisposition is genetic, then we have to acertain how it fits into the development of the species. Moderation of overcrowding could count, if you believe we have developed this genetic predisposition in order to combat starvation, but it seems that starvation does a pretty good job of reducing the surplus population, as does disease. As a matter of fact, the majority of factors that reduce population are generally classified as "bad things", but let's not go there just now.

The cause is a fascinating discussion, but we still have yet to state with any certainty that predisposition is destiny. Am I gay because of my genes, or am I gay because of who's jeans I choose to get into?

Though that leads to the argument about human technology reducing environmental stress factors and holding on to traits that otherwise would be weeded out…

Besides Darwinism does not hold true in its pure form anyways.

Don't get me wrong. It is an interesting question. If we postulate that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition, then we have to ask how it gets propogated, if homosexual predisposition keeps one from procreating. True, homosexual people have had heterosexual relationships, often for societal reasons, but biologically speaking, but that has nothing to do with the genetic question.

Then we have to look at the implications regarding Darwinism. If homosexual predisposition is genetic, then we have to acertain how it fits into the development of the species. Moderation of overcrowding could count, if you believe we have developed this genetic predisposition in order to combat starvation, but it seems that starvation does a pretty good job of reducing the surplus population, as does disease. As a matter of fact, the majority of factors that reduce population are generally classified as "bad things", but let's not go there just now.

The cause is a fascinating discussion, but we still have yet to state with any certainty that predisposition is destiny. Am I gay because of my genes, or am I gay because of who's jeans I choose to get into?

I don't know where you were, but *all* of these have been discussed earlier in the thread.

I don't know where you were, but *all* of these have been discussed earlier in the thread.
You've noticed the arguments have become circular too?

Nonsense. Do you not agree that you chose your religion as well? By your argument, why would anyone want to be jewish? They are not only persecuted now and all throughout history, but are straight out hated throughout the world. Funny how many jews there are still...

If I wanted to, I could easily choose to be gay. I could choose to date men and do whatever else homosexuals do. However, I do not. I choose to date women. I choose to have sex with women. Eventually, I will choose to marry a woman.

Uhm... Jews do not choose to be Jewish. They are born that way, like people with Irish parents are born Irish - even if they are living in a different country than Ireland. Some Jewish people practice Judaism, the religion of their ancestors, others do not. If a person not of Jewish ancestory wishes to convert to Judaism they would need to find a liberal or unorthodox Temple, because Orthodox Judaism is only open to people genetically descended from the twelve tribes of Israel.

If you just as easily be gay as straight that would make you a bisexual who is repressing one half of his romantic desires.

Don't get me wrong. It is an interesting question. If we postulate that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition, then we have to ask how it gets propogated, if homosexual predisposition keeps one from procreating. True, homosexual people have had heterosexual relationships, often for societal reasons, but biologically speaking, but that has nothing to do with the genetic question.

Most traits do not come from a single gene. Rather the physical expression is a composite result of several different genes working together. Furthermore, the gene structure is redundant, so what commonly referred to as a "gene" is actually a gene pair - on on each chromosme. On top of this is the fact that traits can be "dominant" or "recessive" - which means that often the physical expression can be "coverd up" even if you have a gene for it (this is why a brown eyed parent can still produce blue eyed offspring). And that is just the VERY basics.

And yet knowledge is used to represent humankind's fall from God (at least in Genesis). So, by that right, we should take pride in falling from God (at least from a fundamentalist Christian/Jewish viewpoint)?
The fall from God is the birth of humanity. So, yes.

The cause is a fascinating discussion, but we still have yet to state with any certainty that predisposition is destiny. Am I gay because of my genes, or am I gay because of who's jeans I choose to get into?
I don't believe in destiny, in that sense, so it's quite easy for me to state with all certainty that prediposition is not destiny. We can still choose not to partake.

A man's having sex with another man does not earn him the label "gay." People can and do still have sex for the sake of sex, with no attraction involved. Personally, I would not think to label someone "gay" unless they had the intention of forming a gay relationship.

What if they find out that there is a "homosexual gene" and I have it. Does that mean I have to give up my heterosexual lifestyle?

What if they find out that there is a "homosexual gene" and I have it. Does that mean I have to give up my heterosexual lifestyle?
there is no "gay gene," and all evidence on human genetics suggests that the existence of such a gene would be virtually impossible. sexuality is a complex behavior, really a set of complex behaviors, and there is no possible way that a single gene could be solely responsible for such an array of traits.

additionally, when it comes to complex behaviors there really isn't any sort of biological predetermination. even if you are 100% gay, and totally attracted only to members of the same sex, you can live as a heterosexual if you so choose. it's much like how a person who really really really really loves chocolate can choose not to eat chocolate, and can even choose to eat something they hate, in place of chocolate. whether or not they SHOULD make that choice is a matter of opinion, and varries from person to person, but we all have the power to control our sexual impulses (to a certain extent).

there is no "gay gene," and all evidence on human genetics suggests that the existence of such a gene would be virtually impossible. sexuality is a complex behavior, really a set of complex behaviors, and there is no possible way that a single gene could be solely responsible for such an array of traits.

additionally, when it comes to complex behaviors there really isn't any sort of biological predetermination. even if you are 100% gay, and totally attracted only to members of the same sex, you can live as a heterosexual if you so choose. it's much like how a person who really really really really loves chocolate can choose not to eat chocolate, and can even choose to eat something they hate, in place of chocolate. whether or not they SHOULD make that choice is a matter of opinion, and varries from person to person, but we all have the power to control our sexual impulses (to a certain extent).
Again I bring up that the topic brought up was less about a control issue more about a point that why would god predispose someone to a specific sinner behavior

Why would he test someone by putting it out of their control (I know there is an argument if such a gene exists but the bounds of the hypothetical situation is that it does exist and neither you or I are equipped to prove one way or another)

Unless maybe he meant for us to genetically engineer ourselves?

Edit: clearing things up

It essentially boils down to if there is a gay gene why would he put homosexuality into our “blueprints” if he didn’t intent for some of us to be that way

Yeah I was joking, but I totally agree with you Bottle.

Yeah I was joking, but I totally agree with you Bottle.
sorry to not pick up on the satire in your post...i am home sick today, and cold medication knocks out both my sense of smell and my sense of humor. and, sadly, there are many people who might actually be wondering the very same question you posted as a joke. i have learnt never to underestimate the confusion of posters on these forums :P.

sorry to not pick up on the satire in your post...i am home sick today, and cold medication knocks out both my sense of smell and my sense of humor. and, sadly, there are many people who might actually be wondering the very same question you posted as a joke. i have learnt never to underestimate the confusion of posters on these forums :P.
wow the sence of humor too ... there should be a warning about that!

and I agree wtih the confusion part

We need to standardize the [/sarcasm] and [/joke] tags (mostly sarcasm though ... that seems to be the most missed)

"Besides Darwinism does not hold true in its pure form anyways."

speaking of darwin, does anyone here know what he was really trying to prove with his theory? probably not. his theory did not have very much to do with evolution other than trying to prove scientifically his bigotted belief that African-American were lower than whites. his theory is that the darker your skin the closer you are to apes.

about homosexuality:

i am what a lot of people here would call a fundamentalist. first, God does not create anybody gay. have you ever read the bible? it specifically says in several different places that homosexuality is evil. the bible even gives an example of two cities being destroyed for their many sins, among them was homosexuality. can you give one single example, from the bible, that shows that God approves of homosexuality?

"Besides Darwinism does not hold true in its pure form anyways."

speaking of darwin, does anyone here know what he was really trying to prove with his theory? probably not. his theory did not have very much to do with evolution other than trying to prove scientifically his bigotted belief that African-American were lower than whites. his theory is that the darker your skin the closer you are to apes.

about homosexuality:

i am what a lot of people here would call a fundamentalist. first, God does not create anybody gay. have you ever read the bible? it specifically says in several different places that homosexuality is evil. the bible even gives an example of two cities being destroyed for their many sins, among them was homosexuality. can you give one single example, from the bible, that shows that God approves of homosexuality?

Ok you’re a fundamentalist thanks for telling us, we would hate to spend the time arguing when logic wont work on you.

I would go read the “why is homosexuality …” threads


Every quote in the bible has been proven ambiguous

But I am fairly sure that you haven’t ACTUALY read it … and if you have you choose to pick and choose what you believe in (believe in one Leviticus rule and not another … the likes of that)
Tired old argument go bible thump somewhere else we aren’t buying

I found the South park approach to work best:

"Don't be Gay, Sparky"

I found the South park approach to work best:

"Don't be Gay, Sparky"
No that leads us back to that horrible "u can train ur dog to not be gay why not ur son"thread!

let me get this straight. when the bible says homosexuality is evil, just like that. that is somehow ambigous? and no i dont pick and choose what i believe. i believe the whole thing. its take or leave. the bible comes as a packagae you cant pick what you like and do that while ignoring what you dont like. i follow, as well as humanly possible, the whole thing.

let me get this straight. when the bible says homosexuality is evil, just like that. that is somehow ambigous? and no i dont pick and choose what i believe. i believe the whole thing. its take or leave. the bible comes as a packagae you cant pick what you like and do that while ignoring what you dont like. i follow, as well as humanly possible, the whole thing.

Ok, so you believe that God condones slavery, genocide, and the denigration of women.

Well, that's your view, but I won't respect you for it.

Buddy, you put your pants on just like everyone else...one leg at a time. You (and I've told others here the same thing before now) You have the right to YOUR opinion. Fine. Not a problem...but don't try to push it off on the rest of us, you ass.

You are absolutely right. It's not as though I were making a joke and in no way pushing anything on anyone. It's not as though this is a forum for debate and sharing of opinions. Shame on me.

SARCASTIC POST

If there is such a thing as genetic homosexuality -

the odds are our "fearless leader" GWB will advocate genetic engineering so that he can fix this defect!!!111oneoneone+shift

Then having opened the Pandora's Box of GE we will then fall down the slippery slope to GEing our intelligence and strength, only leading to a future of either: Gattaca, Brave New World, or Mobile Suit Gundam SEED!!!!!

Allow people to be genetically gay so that humanity does not become further divided!!!!

You've noticed the arguments have become circular too?
Yep. It's the same no matter where you go. I've been at another forum where I've seen the same topic come and go 6 times, and the same people keep saying the same things, both sides looking like swiss cheese in their arguments. But nobody ever bothers taking some cheese balls (supporting facts) to fill the holes. Simply put, I know that one person's not going to change the opinion of someone on the complete opposite side of the fence.

As for one's religion, I don't exactly think it's a choice either. I'd guess that more of that is nurture over nature, but... that's another topic. The same goes for many personality traits. (Okay, so we've got me pegged as a shy, gay atheist... what's next?)

Considering that sexuality is pretty much set in stone by age three, those evil spirits sure do get an early start. Of course, three year olds don't have much say so in how they live their live..... *head explodey*

set in stone by age three? I think not

set in stone by age three? I think not
Oh why didn’t you say so earlier … you don’t think so … cant be true then

set in stone by age three? I think not
Cleary you showed them, what with your limitless credibility on the subject. I know how much painstaking research you have done in this field, and the shear volume of laboratory work as well. I have no choice but to accept this statement at face value as unadulterated truth.

Ok you’re a fundamentalist thanks for telling us, we would hate to spend the time arguing when logic wont work on you.

I would go read the “why is homosexuality …” threads


Every quote in the bible has been proven ambiguous

But I am fairly sure that you haven’t ACTUALY read it … and if you have you choose to pick and choose what you believe in (believe in one Leviticus rule and not another … the likes of that)
Tired old argument go bible thump somewhere else we aren’t buying

it's funny how people label christians as intolerant biggots and then turn around and say things like this.

another sidenote: christians are not the only ones who disagree with homosexuality.

disclaimer: i may or may not be christian. i may or may not be homosexual. make no assumptions about me. :rolleyes:

it's funny how people label christians as intolerant biggots and then turn around and say things like this.

another sidenote: christians are not the only ones who disagree with homosexuality.

disclaimer: i may or may not be christian. i may or may not be homosexual. make no assumptions about me. :rolleyes:

Christians are the ones most vocally opposed to it, thats why they are usually the focus in these types of arguments.

Christians are the ones most vocally opposed to it, thats why they are usually the focus in these types of arguments.
At least in the USA defiantly

For those who believe being gay is a choice, answer one question for me honestly...

At what point in your life did you decide to heterosexual?

In resposne to, "You're Geneticaly Gay, Now What?"...Abortion.
Because of detection before birth/ complete gestation.

In resposne to, "You're Geneticaly Gay, Now What?"...Abortion.
Because of detection before birth/ complete gestation.

youre a frikken moron. if there really is a "gay gene," and it is detected, it is still wrong to abort the child.

set in stone by age three? I think not

Exactly, you don't think. And you apparently don't research either. But that's alright, ignorance is bliss.

youre a frikken moron. if there really is a "gay gene," and it is detected, it is still wrong to abort the child.
Though he is a good example of why selective abortion wouldn’t be a bad thing :p

Well if you can prove that homosexuals are genetically gay probebly wouldn't chnage my mind I still find it discusting but also find it unconstational to ban it and no lagitament arguement against it. How ever their are studies shown that homosexuality is not genetic nor is it really by choice its a mental thing call it a disorder or what ever but any way. I have no link to the source and chnaces are its pritty biased but something to chew on. Observations done have shown that homosexuals are not born gay but mainly deals with how they grew up. A gay man probebly had poor realtion with or no father figure majority of his early childhood life this need for that eventually slips into the back of the mind and eventually resurfaces as a sexual desire. The same was noted with lesbians except with the mother figure. This is a most probebly cuase with 60% to 70% of homosexuals the other 40% to 30% either had horible realtion with the oposite sex and no longer wants anything to do with them or other reasons.

How ever I am not sure how much evidence their is to back this up considering I heard it on a internet radio source but their is also little evidence to prove there is a gay gene that I am aware of.

Well if you can prove that homosexuals are genetically gay probebly wouldn't chnage my mind I still find it discusting but also find it unconstational to ban it and no lagitament arguement against it. How ever their are studies shown that homosexuality is not genetic nor is it really by choice its a mental thing call it a disorder or what ever but any way. I have no link to the source and chnaces are its pritty biased but something to chew on. Observations done have shown that homosexuals are not born gay but mainly deals with how they grew up. A gay man probebly had poor realtion with or no father figure majority of his early childhood life this need for that eventually slips into the back of the mind and eventually resurfaces as a sexual desire. The same was noted with lesbians except with the mother figure. This is a most probebly cuase with 60% to 70% of homosexuals the other 40% to 30% either had horible realtion with the oposite sex and no longer wants anything to do with them or other reasons.

This is all based on *extremely* outdated studies that haven't been followed since the '70s. Perhaps you should try actually doing some research into it before you spout rhetoric?

How ever I am not sure how much evidence their is to back this up considering I heard it on a internet radio source but their is also little evidence to prove there is a gay gene that I am aware of.

No one with any rationality is suggesting a single "gay gene". However, there is quite a bit of evidence pointing to the idea that a set of genetic factors may contribute to sexuality. Other evidence points to hormone balances in utero. And there is some argument for early childhood experiences also being a contributing factor. However, psychological studies agree that sexuality is most likely pretty much set by about age 3.

Just out of curiosity here, does homosexuality in animals make them completely attracted to the same gender, forsaking the other, or do they engage in sex with both genders?

Just out of curiosity here, does homosexuality in animals make them completely attracted to the same gender, forsaking the other, or do they engage in sex with both genders?

In most animals, the default state seems to be bisexuality to one degree or the other.

However, there are animals that are exclusively homosexual, choosing same-sex mates to the exclusion of opposite genders. They do occasionally stray in order to procreate, but go back to their same-sex mates immediately afterwards.

In animals that mate for life, obviously there is complete homosexuality.

Interestingly enough, there have never been any life-long heterosexual pair bonds in dolphins, but there have been life-long male homosexual pair bonds.

There are also "transsexual* bighorn sheep that are male, but act in every way like females - traveling with the female herds and refusing to let themselves be mounted accept during the mating season. "Regular" males travel in their own herd, have sex with each other year-round, and will attempt to mount a female even outside of mating season - but the female will not allow it.