NationStates Jolt Archive

Brains of gays, straights react differently: Study (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1115675412204&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705899037&t=TS_Home&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes)

"It is one more piece of evidence ... that is showing that sexual orientation is not all learned," said Sandra Witelson, an expert on brain anatomy and sexual orientation at the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton.

Witelson, who was not part of the research team, said the findings clearly show a biological link in sexual orientation.

So, what are your thoughts?

(If anyone can't view the article, I can paste the entire thing here).

Didnt this come out a few years ago? I think at least there was a study showing very similair findings. I think it just confirms what we already knew.

Didnt this come out a few years ago? I think at least there was a study showing very similair findings. I think it just confirms what we already knew.
I don't know. But, it pretty much is a shot in the face of the homophobes.

Was this ever actually needed? I mean, how many gay people can you find who would say "Yeah, so I basically decided to start finding other men attactive."

Yay! Leave it to Swedes! There's a little more in-depth description of this at CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/05/09/pheromones.study.reut/index.html

Im not arguing that its a choice, I have no doubt in my mind that your sexual orientation is not a choice. But, the fact remains that this study proves nothing.

A major part of how your brain functions is by associating certain sounds, tastes, odors, feelings, and images with past experiences. Odor seems to be particularly powerful in this regard. If scientists hooked you up to brain imaging machinery and then had you smell something that has a striking resemblance to the smell of your mom's cooking they are going to see certain parts of your brain flare up with activity. This does not mean that you were born with a genetic affinity for foods heavy in garlic and onions. It means only that your brain has associated that smell with mom.

Havent you ever smelled something, and that smell gives you a certain feeling (comfort, sadness, or whatever it may be)? It is very common for this to happen. The funniest example I know of, is that of a New Yorker who has been away from home for quite some time. When they are suddenly faced with that stench of smoggy urine that pervades New York they have this tendency to breathe in deeply and feel comfortable and at home (while the rest of us feel sickened). Does that mean that people born in New York have a genetic affinity for the smell of urine? Of course not, it just means that their brain has associated that smell with all of their childhood memories of home.

Another well known example is that of someone who has lost a loved one and has intense emotions when they smell something that reminds them of that loved one. Some parents who lose a child will smell the child's clothes to be reminded of the child they used to have. The same has been known to occur with those who have lost a spouse. If you were to hook them up to brain imaging devices, Im sure you could see that happen with them too and it says absolutely nothing about their genetics.

That study proves nothing on the topic of homosexuality other than the obvious fact that gay men are attracted to the qualities that define a man (including smell) more than straight men are. We didnt need a study to tell us that.

:rolleyes: unfortunately, the people who believe that homosexuality is a choice are likely to be the same people that believe the world was created in 7 days. Science is something these people instinctively deny.

there is evidence that there is a biological basis for homosexuality, but that's not the only factor that plays into it. There's also societal and cultural aspects that increase or decrease the likelyhood of some one being homosexual. It is also a choice to live a certain lifestyle. After all, biology is only a small portion of the bigger picture.

there is evidence that there is a biological basis for homosexuality, but that's not the only factor that plays into it. There's also societal and cultural aspects that increase or decrease the likelyhood of some one being homosexual. It is also a choice to live a certain lifestyle. After all, biology is only a small portion of the bigger picture.

This was basically my reply. Also, rape and molestation can change a person's sexual preference. My cousin was molested by a woman and a few years later, announced he was gay. This is quite common.

Big flaw, they only study homosexuals and hetrosexuals comparitvely. "Well duh" you might say, but the flaw is that the study cannot prove if the diffrent reactions are as a result of them "becoming" (for want of a better word) homosexual and if they would have responded the same way when they were unaware of their latter sexual orientation. In other words, of course homosexuals and hetrosexuals respond diffrently to diffrent sexual stimulli. That proves very little

Brains of gays, straights react differently: Study (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1115675412204&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705899037&t=TS_Home&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes)
So, what are your thoughts?

(If anyone can't view the article, I can paste the entire thing here).
My response is: Yes and No. It can be a choice, but usually isn't.

I DO know "politicals" (usually lesbian, though a few hard-core Flamers) that chose their partner (orientation?) because of a bad breakup, molestation, general Uber Feminisim or anti-norm activisim. But (at least for gay men) that is not particularly common.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?


BTW, anyone here know what a negative Darwinian load is?

That study proves nothing on the topic of homosexuality other than the obvious fact that gay men are attracted to the qualities that define a man (including smell) more than straight men are. We didnt need a study to tell us that.

The article posted above is brief and incomplete.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/homosexual_brains

Note specifically towards the end, it mentions that there were preferrences not just on gender lines but on sexuality lines. Gay men perferred most scents from other gay men, which implies a difference in the odor to straight men as well. It is very hard to see how a simple choice could influence this.

I don't know. But, it pretty much is a shot in the face of the homophobes.

Oh, God. The remarks I could make about this comment.

Oh, God. The remarks I could make about this comment.

Hahahahahaha, I was thinking the same thing.

The article posted above is brief and incomplete.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/homosexual_brains

Note specifically towards the end, it mentions that there were preferrences not just on gender lines but on sexuality lines. Gay men perferred most scents from other gay men, which implies a difference in the odor to straight men as well. It is very hard to see how a simple choice could influence this.

Not that hard. A difference in grooming habits could account for that, for example.

The lead post in this thread tends to support your argument that it's not a choice: http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=418343

As a Gay Man living in the People's Christian Republic of America ( The United States ), I can assure everyone, being Gay is not something I decided on one morning. This is who I am, who I've always been. A long time ago, I would havw changed it if I could. But I can't, and further more, at this pint in my Life ( I'm a college Sophmore ), I would not want to. I'm Happy with the person I am. Its just that simple.

So gays react differently to pheromones. But are they gay because they react differently (biological)? Or do they react differently because they're gay (behavioral)? Or is it some of both? This study doesn't really tell us one way or the other. The mind can easily change the body - otherwise, there wouldn't be such a thing as the placebo effect. Don't bother with what you "believe" - look at the facts. The facts in this study don't prove that homosexuality is behavioral OR biological.

Im not arguing that its a choice, I have no doubt in my mind that your sexual orientation is not a choice. But, the fact remains that this study proves nothing.

A major part of how your brain functions is by associating certain sounds, tastes, odors, feelings, and images with past experiences. Odor seems to be particularly powerful in this regard. If scientists hooked you up to brain imaging machinery and then had you smell something that has a striking resemblance to the smell of your mom's cooking they are going to see certain parts of your brain flare up with activity. This does not mean that you were born with a genetic affinity for foods heavy in garlic and onions. It means only that your brain has associated that smell with mom.

Havent you ever smelled something, and that smell gives you a certain feeling (comfort, sadness, or whatever it may be)? It is very common for this to happen. The funniest example I know of, is that of a New Yorker who has been away from home for quite some time. When they are suddenly faced with that stench of smoggy urine that pervades New York they have this tendency to breathe in deeply and feel comfortable and at home (while the rest of us feel sickened). Does that mean that people born in New York have a genetic affinity for the smell of urine? Of course not, it just means that their brain has associated that smell with all of their childhood memories of home.

Another well known example is that of someone who has lost a loved one and has intense emotions when they smell something that reminds them of that loved one. Some parents who lose a child will smell the child's clothes to be reminded of the child they used to have. The same has been known to occur with those who have lost a spouse. If you were to hook them up to brain imaging devices, Im sure you could see that happen with them too and it says absolutely nothing about their genetics.

That study proves nothing on the topic of homosexuality other than the obvious fact that gay men are attracted to the qualities that define a man (including smell) more than straight men are. We didnt need a study to tell us that.

im gonna be honest...that was probaby one of the worst, one-sided, off-the-topic arguments i have ever heard. the study, if you payed close enough attention to, also stated a possible genetic defect in hormone transferance from the brain to sexual organs...meaning, a mutation caused it during the development of a fetus or development of sexual organs. that was only one of the reasons as well.

This was basically my reply. Also, rape and molestation can change a person's sexual preference. My cousin was molested by a woman and a few years later, announced he was gay. This is quite common.
I'm not sure that holds water, it probably coincidental.
I was molested by a man and still prefer men. My best friend was molested by a man and he's gay.

As a Gay Man living in the People's Christian Republic of America ( The United States ), I can assure everyone, being Gay is not something I decided on one morning. This is who I am, who I've always been. A long time ago, I would havw changed it if I could. But I can't, and further more, at this pint in my Life ( I'm a college Sophmore ), I would not want to. I'm Happy with the person I am. Its just that simple.

as you can see clearly, it really isnt anything anybody CHOOSES but more simply, they're born with.it is said by other scientists as well...if its accepted by the individual, its phisiological, if its there yet not accepted, its psychological. either way, i dont see any problem with it. I'm straight and i dont look at any gay man with any prejuduce. they're people too.doesnt matter what sexual preference they are. in fact, i have a couple gay friends, and im not gonna lie, they are some of the coolest cats out there.you guys who dont like it, you can just hang out with your non-gay, "sleeping with men will make you go to hell" friends and realize that there are a lot of people out there who are comming forth with being homosexual these days and that it really isnt a problem.have fun because frankly, you might find it a little lonely.
Not to mention, but hating people because they are gay is a little worse than being racist. It is taking a level of HATRED towards a specific TYPE of person and making it much broader. If you hadnt noticed, there are many different people out there, in every RACE that are gay. sounds a little obtuse to me.

Take the time out of your life and watch a few 'Will and Grace' episodes...good show

AND finally, if you are going to use the whole bible thing...about "oh, the bible says men are not to lay with other men...so its against the bible..." then, scooter, check your book again because it states directly that you are not to make that final judgment...God is.not only that but, if its a sin, im certain there is not a mortal soul on Earth that has never sinned. Bring THAT into concideration as well.

AND finally, if you are going to use the whole bible thing...about "oh, the bible says men are not to lay with other men...so its against the bible..." then, Scooter, check your book again because it states directly that you are NOT to make that final judgment...God is.not only that but, if its a sin, im certain there is not a mortal soul on Earth that has never sinned. Bring THAT into consideration as well.

i apologize for the last three posts, user error on my part., the third one is the valid post i wanted. still a little new to site, pardon my mistakes previous.

I'm not sure that holds water, it probably coincidental.
I was molested by a man and still prefer men. My best friend was molested by a man and he's gay.

Well, then I suppose it can deter or arouse...

The researchers divided 36 subjects into three groups — heterosexual men, heterosexual women and homosexual men. All of them were unmedicated, right-handed and HIV-negative.

What does them being right handed have anything to do with it? Ohhh, the comments I could make about that.

It really shouldn't matter whether they choose to be gay or not. You choose religion, but they don't outlaw Christianity.

And anyone who says that they were born Christian is an idiot. :headbang:

Well, then I suppose it can deter or arouse...

You're assuming that your friend would not have been gay if he hadn't been molested. I've never been molested, and I've never been attracted to women. I was gay before I even knew there was a word to describe it.

Please --- I know, for instance, that I choose to be tall. Not once did I ever want to be short. I always wanted to be tall. I can only assume that all these short people choose to be short - there can be no other explanation for it. After all, everyone is exaclty alike in every other way - so, of course, if we all simply choose to be exactly 6 feet tall - we all would be. No, I don't see how there can be any other answer to it. A person is as tall as they decide to be.

Here's a shocking and controversial idea - you're all right (or at least alot of you are). Just maybe, it's influenced by more than one factor ("heresy!", they cry ^_~ ). Some are born that way, due to genetics or their soul or whatever. Some are socially or psychologically affected one way or the other (molestation, militant feminism, etc.).

As it stands; even if it's a sin, it doesn't make that person a bad person (everybody sins). Even if it's a sin, they can still get into heaven. Even if it's a sin, the government has no business restricting the activities of two consenting adults who aren't harming anything other than the sensibilities of those with cranial-rectal placement issues.

until scientists can isolate the "gay gene" you will never prove that argument.

and even so it would be considered a defective gene and we would be on the precipice of something akin to the china "one child policy" except this time instead of looking for the female/male chromosomes, parents will be looking to weed out the "gay gene"

aside from the genetics we are born with just about EVERYTHING in life is a result of choices we make. even if you have so called homosexual desires you still must choose to act on them. the "i was born that way" argument to me is nothing more than a cheap copout or an attempt to avoid responsibility in my book. if you want to be gay thats fine. just understand that the majority of modern society doesn't consider it an acceptable lifestyle. if you can understand that (and not try to force everybody else to accept your viewpoint) and still want to live the that lifestyle, more power to you.
:cool:

Please --- I know, for instance, that I choose to be tall. Not once did I ever want to be short. I always wanted to be tall. I can only assume that all these short people choose to be short - there can be no other explanation for it. After all, everyone is exaclty alike in every other way - so, of course, if we all simply choose to be exactly 6 feet tall - we all would be. No, I don't see how there can be any other answer to it. A person is as tall as they decide to be.
This is the funniest specific argument I've ever heard to knock the "gay choice" thing.

Personally I think it's a matter of both genetics AND life experience. I mean, obviously both play into it in some way or another. There's no way to specifically disprove that either can be major factors. I mean, some of the kids I went to school with last year (they transferred) were fraternal twins who were raised in a small Kansas town, and literally both had the exact same social circle. Yet one of them has "chosen" to be gay, and has apparently been like that for many years, while the other is perfectly content with women. The homosexual not only has a behavioural disorder, but also imbalanced hormones, which some argue is a common genetic trait in homosexuals.

Also, their mother was diagnosed early on with Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (aka Stein-Leventhal Syndrome, a more familiar title), which is in some circles theorized to cause the above-mentioned hormone imbalance, though I know that's usually something that affects females rather than males.

Just wanted to get my opinion out......nothing better to do.....

Well, then I suppose it can deter or arouse...EWW! Don't go there. Please think about the implications of your post.

well... if it's a choice and heterosexual orientation is the naturally occurring norm someone might need to explain why exclusive homosexuals generally have/had no heterosexual desires...at all.

Oh yeah, one other thing.......

Homosexuality was actually mentioned in terms of a relationship between several biblical figures. The "homosexuality" referred to these days is all-encompassing, while many theologens believe that anything referred to in those days was more covering same-sex acts of lust, rather than love. It didn't really cover the bases of relationships or commitment.....which was not at all uncommon.

So to anyone who MIGHT post on here that homosexuality is "an invention of the modern society" (something I've seen a lot on these types of discussions).....rubbish.

Simonist']
So to anyone who MIGHT post on here that homosexuality is "an invention of the modern society" (something I've seen a lot on these types of discussions).....rubbish.

when I was a kid I thought I invented it. Man I was worried. :D

when I was a kid I thought I invented it. Man I was worried. :D
You just made my morning. Rest easy, tsipotchka.

Simonist']This is the funniest specific argument I've ever heard to knock the "gay choice" thing.
...and I'm a straight, old, white guy...

well... if it's a choice and heterosexual orientation is the naturally occurring norm someone might need to explain why exclusive homosexuals generally have/had no heterosexual desires...at all.

Myself, I'd just like all these proponents of the "it's genetic" argument to explain to me how a self-eliminating trait can be on the rise?

After all, most homosexual couples don't produce children (yes, there are exceptions, but they're just that - exceptions); how is it possible that a population with a genetic trait that limits reproduction, can be increasing?

I'd love to have that answered...

BTW, the reaction to overpopulation argument doesn't really hold water. If it did we would see marked increases in homosexuality in India, China, and South America. Instead the marked increases are in first world nations with relatively low population density.

Brains of gays, straights react differently: Study (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1115675412204&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705899037&t=TS_Home&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes)



So, what are your thoughts?

(If anyone can't view the article, I can paste the entire thing here).
My thoughts are, why didn't they test gay women as well? Why didn't they test men/women who identify as bisexual, asexual, or omnisexual? Let's get it all out of the way now so we can stop with the pointless debating of whether or not other sexualities are natural or a psychological choice and get on with our lives!

Please --- I know, for instance, that I choose to be tall. Not once did I ever want to be short. I always wanted to be tall. I can only assume that all these short people choose to be short - there can be no other explanation for it. After all, everyone is exaclty alike in every other way - so, of course, if we all simply choose to be exactly 6 feet tall - we all would be. No, I don't see how there can be any other answer to it. A person is as tall as they decide to be.
*Giggles hysterically*

there is evidence that there is a biological basis for homosexuality, but that's not the only factor that plays into it. There's also societal and cultural aspects that increase or decrease the likelyhood of some one being homosexual. It is also a choice to live a certain lifestyle. After all, biology is only a small portion of the bigger picture.


acutally, i would say that the biological aspect proves that a person is born gay, and the societal and cultural aspect only play a role with whether the person knows and understands that they are gay, and also plays a role on whether they will accept the fact or deny it.

Myself, I'd just like all these proponents of the "it's genetic" argument to explain to me how a self-eliminating trait can be on the rise?

After all, most homosexual couples don't produce children (yes, there are exceptions, but they're just that - exceptions); how is it possible that a population with a genetic trait that limits reproduction, can be increasing?

I'd love to have that answered...

BTW, the reaction to overpopulation argument doesn't really hold water. If it did we would see marked increases in homosexuality in India, China, and South America. Instead the marked increases are in first world nations with relatively low population density.

Firstly I am not aware of any evidence it's 'on the rise' and assuming it slows net population growth is being simplistic. As for being a self-eliminating trait to be true would necessitate a seperate complex of genes apart from what gives rise to sexual behavior. If Mendelian genetics theory mattered with sex and sexual orientation all your children would be hermaphroditic bisexuals.

Was this ever actually needed? I mean, how many gay people can you find who would say "Yeah, so I basically decided to start finding other men attactive."
Theres a difference between gay men saying it and jesus humpers believing it.

Theres a difference between gay men saying it and jesus humpers believing it.
"Jesus humpers"

Wouldn't this actually make about half of them gay, by the very definition....? Bi-curious, at the very least?

Simonist']"Jesus humpers"

Wouldn't this actually make about half of them gay, by the very definition....? Bi-curious, at the very least?
I have a theory on that, though its more than likely wrong.
Oh all the men that fool themselves for their entire lives...and woman too. *sigh* what a waste of a life.

I really honestly hope that scientists don't find the "gay gene"
at least not in any medically testable way, and hopefully not in any curable way.
at least not for a while, until society doesn't have a problem with homosexuals.

If we could "fix" homosexuals, so only the rare exception got through, what a horrible life it would be for them. There would be absolutely no tolerance for them at all, they would be seen as having some sort of "disease" or something wrong with them, and they wouldn't have many partners at all to choose from.

Does it really matter if it's a choice, or if it's biological? I'm interested from an abstract point of view, personally I believe everyone is bisexual to a greater or lesser degree, and society affects whether we act on that.

The fact still remains that certain people, whether they are right or not, feel like they don't have a choice in the matter. And, since they aren't hurting anyone, we should accept what they want. Whatever the cause for their opinion on why they are gay.

Someone made the point that it's still a choice. Sure, even if you are naturally inclined towards being gay to the extent that you don't find females attractive, you can "choose" not to live the gay lifestyle, or have gay sex. That's entirely 100% true. But a silly argument. Honestly, I'm straight, and I can't think how depressed I would be if I felt obliged to be in a gay relationship or marriage. I'd be depressed if I couldn't have a relationship or marriage, either. That would be horrible, human contact, caring and yes, even sex are actual physical needs. It takes exceptional people to choose to deny these needs, many priests and other holy people who have devoted their life to another order and made the concious choice to not have sex still fail. And that was *their choice*.

So when saying you can "choose" to not live a gay lifestyle, what are we doing? Expecting gay people to choose not to have sex with someone they find attractive, and ALSO expecting them to either choose to have sex with someone they aren't physically attracted to, or to live a life without having a close sexual relationship. Wow, what a harsh expectation.
What an awful life for these poor people.

So, yeah, I don't much care if its biological or societal, it's still something that's here to stay.

Heck, gays were openly accepted back in the time of the ancient greeks. It was quite usual for greek soldiers to have their gay partner that they stay with while in the field, and their wife back home. I don't think we can really say that homosexuality is on the rise. Perhaps people are just less afraid to admit it, since homosexual deaths by beating and other such awful atrocities are on the decrease (I hope!). I'm going to accept the seemingly rising numbers of openly gay people are a really good sign of the increasing understanding, and acceptance of modern people. I'm going to accept it as a sign that some of the core christian ideas, like tolerance, are making a difference to our world.

And I don't care if christians are upset that I'm hijacking their beliefs to be pro-gay.

*shrug*
At any rate, if it was a choice, I'd choose to be bi. Twice the number of potential partners, rock on!!!

*shrug*
At any rate, if it was a choice, I'd choose to be bi. Twice the number of potential partners, rock on!!!
Strangely enough, that attitude is exactly why I keep nagging my bi friend for being greedy.....

Thank you for unwittingly supporting my cause on that!

Anyone who calls themselves Christian, yet hates gays, is not a Christian.

In the Bible it says to hate the sin but love the sinner.

I don't hate gay people...but I believe that going after hairy, bobbing man-ass (in the case of men) is a sin.

*sits back and waits for the unwarranted "homophobe" allegations to roll in*

Anyone who calls themselves Christian, yet hates gays, is not a Christian.

In the Bible it says to hate the sin but love the sinner.

I don't hate gay people...but I believe that going after hairy, bobbing man-ass (in the case of men) is a sin.

*sits back and waits for the unwarranted "homophobe" allegations to roll in*
Good point. Good good point. But if you insist on using language such as "hairy, bobbing man-ass", you might end up turning perfectly straight girls (such as myself) off of it as well. Nobody wants to think of that while trying to get some action, I mean.....come on....

Yall think it's time for me to stop getting email notifications of updates? Yeah, I'll leave off for awhile now.....

Simonist']Good point. Good good point. But if you insist on using language such as "hairy, bobbing man-ass", you might end up turning perfectly straight girls (such as myself) off of it as well. Nobody wants to think of that while trying to get some action, I mean.....come on....

Yall think it's time for me to stop getting email notifications of updates? Yeah, I'll leave off for awhile now.....
ROFLMAO!

i'm still not sure this proves heredity over environment. gay men respond to male pheromones, but is this why they are sexually attracted to men, or is it a learned response to the submininal scent of men whom the are already sexually attracted to.

I really honestly hope that scientists don't find the "gay gene"
at least not in any medically testable way, and hopefully not in any curable way.
at least not for a while, until society doesn't have a problem with homosexuals.

If we could "fix" homosexuals, so only the rare exception got through, what a horrible life it would be for them. There would be absolutely no tolerance for them at all, they would be seen as having some sort of "disease" or something wrong with them, and they wouldn't have many partners at all to choose from.

Does it really matter if it's a choice, or if it's biological? I'm interested from an abstract point of view, personally I believe everyone is bisexual to a greater or lesser degree, and society affects whether we act on that.

The fact still remains that certain people, whether they are right or not, feel like they don't have a choice in the matter. And, since they aren't hurting anyone, we should accept what they want. Whatever the cause for their opinion on why they are gay.

Someone made the point that it's still a choice. Sure, even if you are naturally inclined towards being gay to the extent that you don't find females attractive, you can "choose" not to live the gay lifestyle, or have gay sex. That's entirely 100% true. But a silly argument. Honestly, I'm straight, and I can't think how depressed I would be if I felt obliged to be in a gay relationship or marriage. I'd be depressed if I couldn't have a relationship or marriage, either. That would be horrible, human contact, caring and yes, even sex are actual physical needs. It takes exceptional people to choose to deny these needs, many priests and other holy people who have devoted their life to another order and made the concious choice to not have sex still fail. And that was *their choice*.

So when saying you can "choose" to not live a gay lifestyle, what are we doing? Expecting gay people to choose not to have sex with someone they find attractive, and ALSO expecting them to either choose to have sex with someone they aren't physically attracted to, or to live a life without having a close sexual relationship. Wow, what a harsh expectation.
What an awful life for these poor people.

So, yeah, I don't much care if its biological or societal, it's still something that's here to stay.

Heck, gays were openly accepted back in the time of the ancient greeks. It was quite usual for greek soldiers to have their gay partner that they stay with while in the field, and their wife back home. I don't think we can really say that homosexuality is on the rise. Perhaps people are just less afraid to admit it, since homosexual deaths by beating and other such awful atrocities are on the decrease (I hope!). I'm going to accept the seemingly rising numbers of openly gay people are a really good sign of the increasing understanding, and acceptance of modern people. I'm going to accept it as a sign that some of the core christian ideas, like tolerance, are making a difference to our world.

And I don't care if christians are upset that I'm hijacking their beliefs to be pro-gay.

*shrug*
At any rate, if it was a choice, I'd choose to be bi. Twice the number of potential partners, rock on!!!


I think you hit the nail squarely on the head there. Anybody who would care to argue the main point of this post would either be putting their faith that they know it's a sin ahead of any morals they'd have, or just be a plain imbecile.

I don't know. But, it pretty much is a shot in the face of the homophobes.

Yes, because if anything has ever been shown to win over the hearts and minds of the closed-minded and intolerant it's science and rational debate.

In the Bible it says to hate the sin but love the sinner.

A quick question: Where exactly in the Bible is that doctrine located? I've never been able to find it....

Yes, because if anything has ever been shown to win over the hearts and minds of the closed-minded and intolerant it's science and rational debate.

Man, that was an awfully loaded statement that is. You do realize that statements like that are designed to immediately dismiss the opinions of anyone who holds a viewpoint that differs from your own, don't you?

BTW, as a close-minded and intolerant bigot (by what I'm certain is your definition) I'd love to see some actual science and rational discussion to support your argument. What was linked to here and then discussed afterwards certainly isn't it.

I'm not sure that gays actually want there to be conclusive evidence that homosexuality is purely biological. Then things like the FDA banning gays from donating sperm becomes perfectly logical. If a mother doesn't want the possibility of her child being born gay, the logical thing to do is to avoid sperm donations by gay men.

If it's found to be genetic, then you have the purely biological standpoints. The whole idea of natural selection says that those traits that promote the passing of genetic material to the next generation are good. Those that hinder it are bad. Hence, homosexuality = bad. Suddenly it becomes a genetic defect which, if identified, could possibly be corrected with the proper technology and voila, no more homosexuals.

A quick question: Where exactly in the Bible is that doctrine located? I've never been able to find it....


The specific phrase "love sinner, hate sin" is not in the Bible but its a paraphrase of the way in which God treets us. If God hated us for being sinners then we would all be condemned and going to hell. But he doesnt. He loves us all and cares for us deeply. He hates sin, and he hates it when we sin but he doesnt ever hate us. He loves us more than we know, and Jesus explained to us that we should love others as he loved us. I think you can agree with me on this.