Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Riddle me this.

Lets assume that homosexuality is genetic.

If homosexuality became widely accepted and marriage was legal everyware, wouldnt the homosexuality gene die off eventually?

Since some gay people dont come out and decide to just marry the opposite sex and live a straight life and have kids with the opposite sex (passing the gene down) the gene will never dissapear.

But if it is widely accepted and marriage is welcomed, most gays would marry each other and not be able to have kids(adopt kids yes, but it wouldnt be passing genes) so there would no longer be any homosexuality since the gene isnt being passed down to any other generations.

Ya dig?

Ever hear of a Punnett Square?

The answer would be no to your question.

Straight couples would still have gay kids every now and then.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Straight couples would still have gay kids every now and then.

thats true...

Originally posted by Soleran
Ever hear of a Punnett Square?

The answer would be no to your question.

That's assuming that Gay-ness is the recessive trait. If on the other hand it is a dominant mutation, then the trait would die out over time without reproduction. The only source of new gay genes would be new mutations.

Even with the recessive gene it gay numbers would dwindle over time due to genetic drift and natural selection. It would just take longer.

Last time I checked, it was only straight couples that are having gay kids... Two guys or two girls cannot reproduce, so homosexuality has always and will always be here. Unless of course science is able to single out and isolate the gay gene, then couples could weed out the gay aspect.

Originally posted by KidRock
Lets assume that homosexuality is genetic.
That could very well be true, but I often wonder about a few years ('96-'98) where many of the chicks in my hometown were bisexual or gay, and then in '99 and '00 they were all straight again and even had kids and married.

Homosexuality is genetic? Well that's gotta shock the disgruntled fathers of the world! "But dad, it's genetic!" <What?! you mean I'm gay too. The neigbours can't find out!> "Well I could have gotten my atraction towards men from my mother's side..." <No way, she went lesbo after marrying me!>

Originally posted by Madman_V3N0M
Homosexuality is genetic? Well that's gotta shock the disgruntled fathers of the world! "But dad, it's genetic!" <What?! you mean I'm gay too. The neigbours can't find out!> "Well I could have gotten my atraction towards men from my mother's side..." <No way, she went lesbo after marrying me!>

You do realize it is possible to pass on a trait without it being active in your own body right?

Originally posted by botankus
That could very well be true, but I often wonder about a few years ('96-'98) where many of the chicks in my hometown were bisexual or gay, and then in '99 and '00 they were all straight again and even had kids and married.

Ofcourse being gay is a fashion to some ppl aswell...

Originally posted by BornToRule
Ofcourse being gay is a fashion to some ppl aswell...

Do you think straight people become gay out of some fashion treand? Huh?

Yeah! I heard genocide is fashionable this year!

Originally posted by Robtard
Do you think straight people become gay out of some fashion treand? Huh?

I don't know, but like I said, there were a few years where none of them were bisexual before ('93-'96), then a good deal of them were ('97-'99), and then they all weren't bisexual again ('00-'01). I moved to another city (not because of that, LOL) after '01 so I don't know if bisexuality rose to power again in that town.

Originally posted by Robtard
Do you think straight people become gay out of some fashion treand? Huh?

Dude its true!!! i swear! atleast in some cases. We used to have this dude in our class he was a fashion geek, and when homosexuality became more focused in media. He started to dress Gay and then he became gay after a while.

Point is, it's very possible it could be both genetic and fashionably popular. For example, some girls are born with big boobs. Some aren't but want them because they're considered cool. Therefore, they have plastic surgery to increase their boob size. I'm not sure if that's the best example, but it's the only one I could think of with 12 minutes to go in the work day.

Originally posted by BornToRule
Dude its true!!! i swear! atleast in some cases. We used to have this dude in our class he was a fashion geek, and when homosexuality became more focused in media. He started to dress Gay and then he became gay after a while.

I have a gut instinct that the guy in your story was gay all along and when he finally matured enough and saw that it was "Okay" to be gay, he finally came out.

Originally posted by botankus
Point is, it's very possible it could be both genetic and fashionably popular. For example, some girls are born with big boobs. Some aren't but want them because they're considered cool. Therefore, they have plastic surgery to increase their boob size. I'm not sure if that's the best example, but it's the only one I could think of with 12 minutes to go in the work day.

That is silly... Do you then choose to be attracted to the opposite sex... Or are you equally attracted to both men and women yet consciously choose the opposite out out fashion or other sense?

no, there very much is such a thing as fashionably gay, though most if not all are attention whoring temporary bisexual girls. *HOWEVER* straight society rewards them with attention and adoration, so given something to gain there is an exception. since there is nothing to gain by being a gay man as opposed to a straight man, i dont see how any man would choose to be gay

Originally posted by Robtard
That is silly... Do you then choose to be attracted to the opposite sex... Or are you equally attracted to both men and women yet consciously choose the opposite out out fashion or other sense?

It's silly to think otherwise. C'mon man, I don't what they're teaching you in California about trends (oops), but you gotta be cave crazy (no homosexual pun intended...I think) to believe that there aren't girls who tell others that they're bisexual and get involved with kissing girls even though they have no true feelings for them but only want to elevate their social status.

Originally posted by PVS
no, there very much is such a thing as fashionably gay, though most if not all are attention whoring temporary bisexual girls.

Then they are not really gay are they...

Originally posted by botankus
It's silly to think otherwise. C'mon man, I don't what they're teaching you in California about trends (oops), but you gotta be cave crazy (no homosexual pun intended...I think) to believe that there aren't girls who tell others that they're bisexual and get involved with kissing girls even though they have no true feelings for them but only want to elevate their social status.

Then they are not really gay are they?

I could be gay if I wanted to....

Originally posted by botankus
I don't know, but like I said, there were a few years where none of them were bisexual before ('93-'96), then a good deal of them were ('97-'99), and then they all weren't bisexual again ('00-'01). I moved to another city (not because of that, LOL) after '01 so I don't know if bisexuality rose to power again in that town.

Sexual experimentation is very common. Everywhere. Doesn't mean they were ever gay or bi. Just, 'curious'.

And thank you Debs for proving my point. She's not gay but could very much tell you she was if it thought it would elevate her social status with you.

So NO, they're not really gay...but if they tell you they are and since you're not inside their mind, you'll never know that they weren't. That's what being fashionably gay is, and like PVS said, there is a ton of it.

Originally posted by debbiejo
I could be gay if I wanted to....

No, you could willingly make yourself have sex with another woman, but you could not willingly make yourself feel and be attracted to another woman as a true lesbian could. You're either born with it or you're not.

How do you know? Though I am not and am not interested in the same sex. Love is love, and ................

Well, the whole subject title is ....acceptable thing to 'come out' as gay...so I thought I'd at least stay on-topic. If you're really dead set on a yes/no boolean argument, then another gay thread might be suited for you.

Originally posted by debbiejo
How do you know?

Because I know I was born straight and did not choose to be attracted to women sexually, it just is. I might as well try to change my eye color through mental discipline if I thought I could make myself gay.

Originally posted by Robtard
Then they are not really gay are they...

hey, i agree. however the point was that some people choose to act homosexual. and even be homosexually intimate....fashionably gay


:edit: i love how my post keeps disappearing and reappearing. are they ever going to get the server right?

Originally posted by PVS
hey, i agree. however the point was that some people choose to act homosexual. and even be homosexually intimate....fashionably gay

Poseurs...

Well like I said, I am not gay, but many people can do some experimentation and find out with knowing the person that they do love them and that they know that a person of the same sex would really know how to please them..........

Originally posted by PVS
hey, i agree. however the point was that some people choose to act homosexual. and even be homosexually intimate....fashionably gay


:edit: i love how my post keeps disappearing and reappearing. are they ever going to get the server right?

Yes and like previously said, If i meet someone who says he/she is gay
she is gay to me because i dont know whats going on in their head(if they are acting or not).

Originally posted by debbiejo
Well like I said, I am not gay, but many people can do some experimentation and find out with knowing the person that they do love them and that they know that a person of the same sex would really know how to please them..........
To quote Steve Stiffler: This (thread) just got a whole hell of a lot more interesting...

In some ancient societies everyone was gay, and was taught to be gay... so I'm pretty sure it's not as genetic as one might think.

Originally posted by debbiejo
I could be gay if I wanted to....


Yeah I tell all the girls I'm gay cuz they get all the chicks!



No, recessive or dominant it can be passed on, you didn't pass the punnett square test.

wow....so my initial post has vanished and thus my point. oh well....at least robtard saw it so i know im not going mad

Originally posted by botankus
To quote Steve Stiffler: This (thread) just got a whole hell of a lot more interesting... hahahahaa..........well it's simple.........you just put your mind to it..........though AGAIN I am straight, why couldn't a person love another and want to experiment......

I am straight again........I am , I really am.......

Originally posted by Robtard
Last time I checked, it was only straight couples that are having gay kids... Two guys or two girls cannot reproduce, so homosexuality has always and will always be here. Unless of course science is able to single out and isolate the gay gene, then couples could weed out the gay aspect.

"has always"? If we assume that homosexuality is genetic then it must have arisen via mutation sometime in history. So it has a beginning. History is against it always being around as well. It is only in the past half century that it has become as big as it is. Some gay advocates say that there were just as many gays back then, but they wouldn't come out for fear of society. Again, evidence points in the other direction. Low divorce rates, More productive people with less psychological things going on, etc.

No, I don't think homosexuality is an eternal thing, it had a beginning, and we could stamp it out (if it were actually ethical to do so).

I'm soooooo glad Deb... next time try to be bisexual and see how much fun you'll have.

There is no gay gene.

Originally posted by docb77
"has always"? If we assume that homosexuality is genetic then it must have arisen via mutation sometime in history. So it has a beginning. History is against it always being around as well. It is only in the past half century that it has become as big as it is. Some gay advocates say that there were just as many gays back then, but they wouldn't come out for fear of society. Again, evidence points in the other direction. Low divorce rates, More productive people with less psychological things going on, etc.

No, I don't think homosexuality is an eternal thing, it had a beginning, and we could stamp it out (if it were actually ethical to do so).

Homosexuality has been around for a LONG time... Take the Torah as an example, it states that homosexuality is a sin therefore telling us that homosexuality was around thousands of years ago and didn't recently just pop up.

The only reason divorce rates were lower is because divorce was looked down upon more so than now. I also highly doubt that homosexuality in one partner is a leading or even a major cause for divorce.

Exactly how would you stamp it out?

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
There is no gay gene.

Then what makes a person homosexual?

Originally posted by Robtard
Homosexuality has been around for a LONG time... Take the Torah as an example, it states that homosexuality is a sin therefore telling us that homosexuality was around thousands of years ago and didn't recently just pop up.

The only reason divorce rates were lower is because divorce was looked down upon more so than now. I also highly doubt that homosexuality in one partner is a leading or even a major cause for divorce.

Exactly how would you stamp it out?

and divorce was looked down on because... There's no evidence that multitudes of gays were just in hiding back then.

As far as how it could be stamped out... 2 ways.

1 - outlaw porn, execute child molesters, and promote a religious environment like that spoken of by Washington in his farewell address.

2 - the hitler method.

Of course I don't advocate #2. And I don't think that #1 will ever happen thanks to the leftists.


Originally posted by Robtard
Then what makes a person homosexual?

Nature vs nurture...

Originally posted by docb77
Nature vs nurture...

No. No one is taught to be gay. It has nothing to do with absent fathers or oppressive mothers.

Originally posted by Robtard
Then what makes a person homosexual?

I said there was no gay gene. But I didn't say it wasn't genetic. From everything I've read, it has most to do with the fact that female bodies can produce both male and female children. The child is producing it's own hormones that react with the mothers hormones. And vice versa. This interacts with the childs genetic make-up. So, while there is no single gay gene, it's genes that turn on and off depending on the child's bodily development.

Originally posted by Soleran
Ever hear of a Punnett Square?

The answer would be no to your question.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Straight couples would still have gay kids every now and then.

Originally posted by docb77
and divorce was looked down on because...People were socially constrained enough to think that staying together and being miserable, constantly fighting, and never having sex is better than accepting you're not meant to be together, parting ways in search of someone more suited.
Originally posted by docb77
There's no evidence that multitudes of gays were just in hiding back then.

As far as how it could be stamped out... 2 ways.

1 - outlaw porn, execute child molesters, and promote a religious environment like that spoken of by Washington in his farewell address.

2 - the hitler method.

Of course I don't advocate #2. And I don't think that #1 will ever happen thanks to the leftists.Your response implies that you believe porn and child molestation are linked to homosexuality. That the latter is somehow dependent upon the former.

Religious environment. Ick.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
No. No one is taught to be gay. It has nothing to do with absent fathers or oppressive mothers.


Ah, but I didn't say anything about teaching. Nurture is a much broader concept than just upbringing. It entails the complete environment during such an upbringing - Dietary, Emotional, Intellectual, Psychological, physical, etc. there are plenty of factors in nurture that could contribute to homosexuality that we may or may not be able to divine.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
People were socially constrained enough to think that staying together and being miserable, constantly fighting, and never having sex is better than accepting you're not meant to be together, parting ways in search of someone more suited.
Your response implies that you believe porn and child molestation are linked to homosexuality. That the latter is somehow dependent upon the former.

Religious environment. Ick.

The evidence is to the contrary. While there were a few dysfunctional families, Families worked better back then than they do now. You're leaping to conclusions about the past. The evidence on the other hand is more favorable to the fact that marriage has only recently started disintigrating.

Yes, I do think that porn and child abuse are linked to homosexuality. I think that they are linked to a host of other societal ills as well. I don't think that they are the only factors, but they are prominent. They're rise in the past few decades corresponds nicely with the destruction of the family.

Out of the closet ............Oii Vey...I'm gay............

Flowers still smell nice.......

Originally posted by docb77

1 - outlaw porn, execute child molesters, and promote a religious environment like that spoken of by Washington in his farewell address.


WHAT!?

Sorry buddy, but I like having titties waved in my face and watching two(or more) consenting adults get freaky.

Kind of odd how you group porn and child molestation in the same category. They aren't even related. One is a crime.

And Washington had wooden teeth. Screw that guy.

Originally posted by docb77

Yes, I do think that porn and child abuse are linked to homosexuality. I think that they are linked to a host of other societal ills as well. I don't think that they are the only factors, but they are prominent. They're rise in the past few decades corresponds nicely with the destruction of the family.

There's also a correlation between believing in God and violent crimes.

http://humaniststudies.org/enews/index.html?id=219&article=7

I say do away with religion.

Originally posted by docb77
and divorce was looked down on because... There's no evidence that multitudes of gays were just in hiding back then.

As far as how it could be stamped out... 2 ways.

1 - outlaw porn, execute child molesters, and promote a religious environment like that spoken of by Washington in his farewell address.

2 - the hitler method.

Of course I don't advocate #2. And I don't think that #1 will ever happen thanks to the leftists.


Nature vs nurture...

LOL... If you actually believe that porn makes people gay and that all child molesters are homosexual then you're delusional my friend. There is absolutely no connection between porn making people gay and most child molesters are not homosexual. Two facts.

As far as your religious utopia goes, that would be doomed from the start... For one, religion controlled or influenced governments lead to oppression, as seen by the theocracies of the pass and present. Religion can easily be used as a tool for corruption and besides, how would this work in America when we have "Freedom of Religion"? You could never choose one religion over another and having multiple religions influencing the government would lead to constant conflicts of interest.

Not sure what you mean by "Nature vs nurture"? You imply that straight people are made gay and that just isn't so.

Originally posted by docb77
The evidence is to the contrary. While there were a few dysfunctional families, Families worked better back then than they do now. You're leaping to conclusions about the past. The evidence on the other hand is more favorable to the fact that marriage has only recently started disintigrating.Oh how I long for the days when I could just tell my woman to get in the kitchen and cook me some eggs. And if she didn't, simple, just knock some sense into her. She can't leave me, where else is she going to get money. Oh, kids are acting up again better cane them.

Marriage is in decline because it's an outdated artificial social construct a piece of paper and a ceremony do not determine how much two people love each other. Divorce is rising because there are no social constraints to prevent people who are unhappy together from separating.
Originally posted by docb77
Yes, I do think that porn and child abuse are linked to homosexuality. I think that they are linked to a host of other societal ills as well. I don't think that they are the only factors, but they are prominent. They're rise in the past few decades corresponds nicely with the destruction of the family. There is no link, you're a bigot and a fool.

Originally posted by docb77
Ah, but I didn't say anything about teaching. Nurture is a much broader concept than just upbringing. It entails the complete environment during such an upbringing - Dietary, Emotional, Intellectual, Psychological, physical, etc. there are plenty of factors in nurture that could contribute to homosexuality that we may or may not be able to divine.

I think you mean devise. Dietary? Are you ****ing kidding me? Because I ate mentos and breast milk, I'm gay? As for everything else, it was addressed by my last post. No one abused me, no one was overbearing, I was encouraged to play sports and compete, I had a father until long after I knew I was gay, there were no subliminal gay vibes sent my way, no one encouraged me to take ballet or singing lessons, I played with GI Joe figures. My brother, my father and my grandfather were all car enthusiasts that tried their best to get me to have some measure of interest in engines, racing and tough-guy attitudes and what kind of oil goes in which engine. But it didn't happen that way.

you people who think that kids were raised to be gay, knowingly or not, need to reconsider their own upbringing. Maybe you'd be gay if you could get anyone of either sex to sleep with you. As they say, "don't hate the player, hate the game".

Originally posted by docb77
Yes, I do think that porn and child abuse are linked to homosexuality.

that's ignorant.

I understand you've bought into the whole, mom and dad, apple pie, sacrific ethic crap that was sold to teh American public back then, but the same familial issues existed back then. The only difference is that child and spouse abuse was less prosecuted. Women could vote, but they were a weak lobbying position at teh time. If you want to live in the past, I invite you to do so. But the rest of the world has decided to move on. If you'd like to join us, then fall in line with the reality of today. Screw this "wish we could go back to teh old days" crap. The past is over. You argue it's better? I argue it's irrelevent. If you want to go back to the days of 4 channels and adds about how wonderful cigarettes and alcohol are, then you're free to do so. Unplug your tv, the computer you spew this crap on, sit by the front dorr waiting on the milk man, wait for Lassie to come tell you Timmy is trapped in a well and tell your woman to get in the kitchen-bare foot and pregnant. But the rest of us will stay here in our high speed, 450 channel, HDTV, DVD-watching, microwavable, solar powerd world that we love.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I think you mean devise. Dietary? Are you ****ing kidding me? Because I ate mentos and breast milk, I'm gay? As for everything else, it was addressed by my last post. No one abused me, no one was overbearing, I was encouraged to play sports and compete, I had a father until long after I knew I was gay, there were no subliminal gay vibes sent my way, no one encouraged me to take ballet or singing lessons, I played with GI Joe figures. My brother, my father and my grandfather were all car enthusiasts that tried their best to get me to have some measure of interest in engines, racing and tough-guy attitudes and what kind of oil goes in which engine. But it didn't happen that way.

you people who think that kids were raised to be gay, knowingly or not, need to reconsider their own upbringing. Maybe you'd be gay if you could get anyone of either sex to sleep with you. As they say, "don't hate the player, hate the game". How exactly did you play with G.I. Joe though? dodgy

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
How exactly did you play with G.I. Joe though? dodgy

Sorry, couldn't resist.

i didn't really play with GI Joe. I'm more a Cobra man myself. There were lot;s of rallies and book burnings in my GI Joe (Cobra) world. Duke and Snake Eyes trying to escape concentration camps and what-not. GI Joe was reduced to little more than Hogan's Heroes. But Cobra, they could get shit done.

Fact, Porn alters brain chemistry. Not much of a stretch from there to think that it could lead to aberrant behavior. Not saying that all people who look at porn turn into monsters, but some do. In other words, Not all porn addicts are sexual deviants, but all sexual deviants are porn addicts. I think you're stretching it if you think there's no relation at all.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I think you mean devise. Dietary? Are you ****ing kidding me? Because I ate mentos and breast milk, I'm gay? As for everything else, it was addressed by my last post. No one abused me, no one was overbearing, I was encouraged to play sports and compete, I had a father until long after I knew I was gay, there were no subliminal gay vibes sent my way, no one encouraged me to take ballet or singing lessons, I played with GI Joe figures. My brother, my father and my grandfather were all car enthusiasts that tried their best to get me to have some measure of interest in engines, racing and tough-guy attitudes and what kind of oil goes in which engine. But it didn't happen that way.

you people who think that kids were raised to be gay, knowingly or not, need to reconsider their own upbringing. Maybe you'd be gay if you could get anyone of either sex to sleep with you. As they say, "don't hate the player, hate the game".

I didn't say diet caused it. I only pointed out that nurture involved more than what mommy and daddy teach you. Drugs alter brain chemistry too, who knows what effects things that mothers take have on children in the womb. There's plenty of possibilites for causes of homosexuality outside of genetics.

Originally posted by Robtard
LOL... If you actually believe that porn makes people gay and that all child molesters are homosexual then you're delusional my friend. There is absolutely no connection between porn making people gay and most child molesters are not homosexual. Two facts.

As far as your religious utopia goes, that would be doomed from the start... For one, religion controlled or influenced governments lead to oppression, as seen by the theocracies of the pass and present. Religion can easily be used as a tool for corruption and besides, how would this work in America when we have "Freedom of Religion"? You could never choose one religion over another and having multiple religions influencing the government would lead to constant conflicts of interest.

Not sure what you mean by "Nature vs nurture"? You imply that straight people are made gay and that just isn't so.

Did I say I wanted to live in a theocracy? I don't think so. What I did say is that the people that live under this democratic republic should be more religious. Read the speech I mentioned before you leap to conclusions.

And yes, the decline of marriage has a correlation with the increase of various aberrant behaviors. Can anyone prove cause and effect? No, that's true of most statistics. But my opinion that they, along with pornography, are related is just as intelligent as any of the opposing opinions I've read. Moreso more often than not.

"I know! We'll dig out way out. No, no, dig up, stupid."

"Porn causes people to become gay."
"Porn causes aberrant behaviour."
"Porn can turn people into monsters."
"People who watch porn become sexual deviants."

So is one to surmise that to you gay people are monstrous sexual deviants prone to aberrant behaviour?

Your opinion is just the backward beliefs of a bigot.

Look mom, alliteration.

Originally posted by docb77
Fact, Porn alters brain chemistry. Not much of a stretch from there to think that it could lead to aberrant behavior. Not saying that all people who look at porn turn into monsters, but some do. In other words, Not all porn addicts are sexual deviants, but all sexual deviants are porn addicts. I think you're stretching it if you think there's no relation at all.

In what sense? Any sexual arousal could be said to be altering ones brain chemistry - what is the difference seeing, say, a female engaged in a sexual act on a piece of film and seeing ones wife engaged in a sexual act in front of you?

Porn is a byproduct of sexual desire, both normal and deviant - not the other way round. A heterosexual watches heterosexual pornography due to a desire to fulfill a sexual need, a pedophile acquires child pornography for the same reason. Not the other way round, a normal person doesn't see child pornography and get turned, just like a heterosexual doesn't see gay pornography and become turned.

Pornography is an effect of sexuality, not a cause.

I do believe he's saying pornography as a whole whether it's a man with a woman, a woman with a woman, a man with a man, or multiple combinations of the above, is the cause of homosexuality. Which is somewhere in my top 200 stupidest things I've heard this week. But since about 185 of those are things from JIA I think I can say it makes it into the top 20.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I do believe he's saying pornography as a whole whether it's a man with a woman, a woman with a woman, a man with a man, or multiple combinations of the above, is the cause of homosexuality. Which is somewhere in my top 200 stupidest things I've heard this week. But since about 185 of those are things from JIA I think I can say it makes it into the top 20.

I would have to agree.

Originally posted by docb77
Fact, Porn alters brain chemistry.

you think porn alters brain chemistry, but in-the-womb hormonal effects can't? Give me your dealer's number, because I'd love to smoke teh crack he's peddling. Where are your facts? Why can porn alter the behavior of a child molester in your opinion? Because you think that being a *** is a learned, taught, behavior. I'd love to get just as petty. I know my dad could kick your dad's ass. I wonder why how tough someone is refelcts how straight their child is going to be.


Originally posted by docb77
I didn't say diet caused it. I only pointed out that nurture involved more than what mommy and daddy teach you. Drugs alter brain chemistry too, who knows what effects things that mothers take have on children in the womb. There's plenty of possibilites for causes of homosexuality outside of genetics.

of course you didn't say diet caused it. Because you decided to lump diet in with how a child is raised, what kind of drugs their mother took while pregnant, the air pollution content of the household and the type of toilet cakes they decided to use. All your arguments are shit. Why shold one make any more or less sense than the next?

So, your next step is to blame all teh things a child learned outside of what was taught to them. Like mommy did too much acid, or daddy drank too much? F**K you. I'd love to know why you're an idiot. Was it because mommy was a crack whore or daddy practiced incest? Read a book instead of your right-wing news outlet and you'll be better for it.

and if there are "so mnay" possiblilities, spell them out for us. Enlighten us.



Originally posted by docb77
Did I say I wanted to live in a theocracy? I don't think so. What I did say is that the people that live under this democratic republic should be more religious.

you might not have said it, but you stumbled over your bible into saying it in this post. You don't wanna live in a theocracy, but people should be more religious in their descision making process? What part of pluto are you from? You've just stuck your foot, along with your leg and right shoulder, in your mouth with the statement above.


Originally posted by docb77
And yes, the decline of marriage has a correlation with the increase of various aberrant behaviors. Can anyone prove cause and effect? No, that's true of most statistics. But my opinion that they, along with pornography, are related is just as intelligent as any of the opposing opinions I've read. Moreso more often than not.


Once again, you do not one damned thing for your own argument. You can't prove it, but neither can you so my opinion s more valid than yours. And it CAN be proven. Look at history. Divorce and how often it happens has nothing to do with behavior. It has to do with morons like you saying that divorce has always been around and it didn't used to happen. Look at Henry teh 8th! Church of England, and many protestant faiths that followed, are a result of wanting a divorce, but not being allowed one. Although, I'm sure your next argument is that murder of a spouse to get out of marriage is legitimate when that's the only avenue afforded you. You need to sit down and catch up on the last 400 years, because it would do you a world of good to join us all in the modern era.

If given a choice, I would like to be a bisexual woman

Originally posted by KidRock
Riddle me this.

Lets assume that homosexuality is genetic.

If homosexuality became widely accepted and marriage was legal everyware, wouldnt the homosexuality gene die off eventually?

Since some gay people dont come out and decide to just marry the opposite sex and live a straight life and have kids with the opposite sex (passing the gene down) the gene will never dissapear.

But if it is widely accepted and marriage is welcomed, most gays would marry each other and not be able to have kids(adopt kids yes, but it wouldnt be passing genes) so there would no longer be any homosexuality since the gene isnt being passed down to any other generations.

Ya dig?
Originally posted by docb77
As far as how it could be stamped out... 2 ways.

1 - outlaw porn, execute child molesters, and promote a religious environment like that spoken of by Washington in his farewell address.

2 - the hitler method.

Of course I don't advocate #2. And I don't think that #1 will ever happen thanks to the leftists.




Nature vs nurture...
Seriously, what makes people say things like this? Did something happen to them in their childhood, or were they born like it? How can we help the world by getting these people 'die off'?

Originally posted by debbiejo
Out of the closet ............Oii Vey...I'm gay............

Flowers still smell nice.......

Congrats!! Ooh, next time you're in town, can you be straight just for a few days?


Kidding! Had to get one in, ya know.

Originally posted by botankus
Congrats!! Ooh, next time you're in town, can you be straight just for a few days?


Kidding! Had to get one in, ya know.

Oh, we certainly noticed that you wanted to get one in.

Originally posted by RZA
If given a choice, I would like to be a bisexual woman

All I read in this is "I love (want to love) the cock"

Originally posted by Bardock42
Oh, we certainly noticed that you wanted to get one in.

I don't know what to say about this. I guess I have no choice but to elaborate on the Hitler Method.

Originally posted by botankus
I don't know what to say about this. I guess I have no choice but to elaborate on the Hitler Method.

Hey, Debbie is a (non-jewish) hottie...no one blames you.

Originally posted by KidRock
Riddle me this.

Lets assume that homosexuality is genetic.

If homosexuality became widely accepted and marriage was legal everyware, wouldnt the homosexuality gene die off eventually?

Since some gay people dont come out and decide to just marry the opposite sex and live a straight life and have kids with the opposite sex (passing the gene down) the gene will never dissapear.

But if it is widely accepted and marriage is welcomed, most gays would marry each other and not be able to have kids(adopt kids yes, but it wouldnt be passing genes) so there would no longer be any homosexuality since the gene isnt being passed down to any other generations.

Ya dig?

Yeah if it were just a fad and not an actual way of life.

Also wouldn't men and women have to stop sleeping together?

I like all women, gay, by, or straight... What?.... Cheese!

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
How can we help the world by getting these people 'die off'?

impossible. idiots breed like cockroaches.

True...

Originally posted by Bardock42
"I love (want to love) the cock"

Fair enough, but be carefull...There are those who would eradicate your desires, if they could.

If I were to choose I would be asexual... or a lesbian.

Originally posted by BornToRule
Dude its true!!! i swear! atleast in some cases. We used to have this dude in our class he was a fashion geek, and when homosexuality became more focused in media. He started to dress Gay and then he became gay after a while.

He most likely WAS Gay already, but didn't come out until Homosexuality started to become more accepted.

Did you ever sort out that possibility ?

OK, I'd like to address the people who are calling me an idiot for a moment. Would you like to see a real idiot? LOOK IN THE FREAKIN' MIRROR. You are so closed minded you wouldn't know a valid opinion if it were Labeled as such by a counsel of Scientists. Anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot? Seems to me that that makes you the ignorant ones. You base your facts on a small number of cases of divorce or whatnot. I'm saying that there is plenty more evidence of happy marriages in the past than of troubled ones. I say that Porn contributes to homosexuality, sexual deviancy, and other monstrosities like child abuse. You accuse me of lumping all of those in together. FREAKING IDIOTS. If I wanted to say that Gays were monsters I would have said that. One cause CAN have multiple outcomes.



OK rant over.

Originally posted by KidRock
Riddle me this.

Lets assume that homosexuality is genetic.

If homosexuality became widely accepted and marriage was legal everyware, wouldnt the homosexuality gene die off eventually?

Since some gay people dont come out and decide to just marry the opposite sex and live a straight life and have kids with the opposite sex (passing the gene down) the gene will never dissapear.

But if it is widely accepted and marriage is welcomed, most gays would marry each other and not be able to have kids(adopt kids yes, but it wouldnt be passing genes) so there would no longer be any homosexuality since the gene isnt being passed down to any other generations.

Ya dig? what about bisexuals?

Originally posted by lord xyz
what about bisexuals?
They're the best! They don't care if you're a man or a woman they love you just as much! Best people in the world...

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Fair enough, but be carefull...There are those who would eradicate your desires, if they could. How can they see the Love in our eyes
And still they don't believe us ?
And after all this time
They don't want to believe us
And if they don't believe us now
Will they ever believe us ?

Originally posted by docb77


OK, I'd like to address the people who are calling me an idiot for a moment. Would you like to see a real idiot? LOOK IN THE FREAKIN' MIRROR. You are so closed minded you wouldn't know a valid opinion if it were Labeled as such by a counsel of Scientists. Anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot? Seems to me that that makes you the ignorant ones. You base your facts on a small number of cases of divorce or whatnot. I'm saying that there is plenty more evidence of happy marriages in the past than of troubled ones. I say that Porn contributes to homosexuality, sexual deviancy, and other monstrosities like child abuse. You accuse me of lumping all of those in together. FREAKING IDIOTS. If I wanted to say that Gays were monsters I would have said that. One cause CAN have multiple outcomes.



OK rant over.

Even though I am not one of the ones that called you an idiot, you need to realize that you make broad baseless accusations...

There is absolutely no proof that marriages were better off 50 years ago solely based on a lower divorce rate. People stay married and miserable to this day and most likely as divorce was looked down upon 50 years ago it would reason that is why divorce rates were lower.

There is absolutely no proof that pornography makes people homosexual, that is just an absolutely ridiculous statement. It would stand to reason that by your logic we are all born with a blank sexual slate and depending on how much porn we watch or if Uncle Lester fingered us when we were six that/if we turn out to be gay or straight. Seriously, that is a clownshoe argument. Do you think you would be gay if you watched porn?

Saying that people "should be more religious" clearly shows your biased attitude. There is absolutely zero proof that religion makes a person a better person. I could make the blanket statement that religion turns people into murderers since there is a large history of war/violence and religion. That is a fact.

...and it is because of these broad baseless accusations that people have called you an idiot.

Originally posted by Robtard
There is absolutely no proof that marriages were better off 50 years ago solely based on a lower divorce rate.

Actually, I think the fact the divorce rate was much lower actually says something.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Actually, I think the fact the divorce rate was much lower actually says something.

yea but i think he is trying to say that just because divorce rate was lower doesnt mean they where happy married.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Actually, I think the fact the divorce rate was much lower actually says something.

Not in this sense in having to do with homosexuality it doesn't.


And, as BornToRule stated, it does not prove that people were happier in mariage back then either. My mother stayed with my father about 20 years longer than she should have since she though divorce was wrong back when she was a devout Catholic and she was a traditional stay at home mother. She was born in the1940's and was taught to obey your man and do not talk back. I have a feeling many women were programmed this way back then and this is the leading cause of lower divorce rates.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not in this sense in having to do with homosexuality it doesn't.

What do you mean?

People married for the right reasons back then. Not to say there were no shotgun marriages, sham marriages or repressed gays getting married in the 50's. But I don't know too many baby boomers who's parents divorced.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What do you mean?

People married for the right reasons back then. Not to say there were no shotgun marriages, sham marriages or repressed gays getting married in the 50's. But I don't know too many baby boomers who's parents divorced.

Actually the alarming number of divorce rates does say something, but not the message you think it does.

The liberation of Divorce strongly shows how many people are actually unhappy in marriages. It also shows that Marriage in itself is nothing valid, it is only as strong as the two individuals allow it to be.

Just because you get married it does NOT "validify" your union by any means. A marriage, whether it be between man and woman, man and man, or woman and woman, is only worth as much as the two people make it to be.

Originally posted by Robtard
I have a feeling many women were programmed this way back then and this is the leading cause of lower divorce rates.

No, I think its becuase people married for the right reasons.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What do you mean?

People married for the right reasons back then. Not to say there were no shotgun marriages, sham marriages or repressed gays getting married in the 50's. But I don't know too many baby boomers who's parents divorced.

(You replied before I finished adding to my original post)

This thread is about homosexual and Docb77 had mentioned that divorce was lower due to lower cases of homosexuality.

People got married for the wrong reasons back then more so than now. Back then if you happened to get your girlfriend pregnant, you were basically forced to get married, it didn't matter if you two were compatible as a couple or not as you mentioned. People were expected to be married by a certain age more so than now etc. etc. etc.

As far as baby boomers staying together. I explained it above, back then women were basically thought to shut up, obey their men and divorce was looked don't upon as an embarrassment and in some cases as a sin.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
No, I think its becuase people married for the right reasons.

Which were/are compared to now?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Actually the alarming number of divorce rates does say something, but not the message you think it does.

Yes it does.

I think the main reason divorce is so common today is because young people get married because they're horny, and then throw in the towel five years later.

And also, celebrities getting married for some extra publicity and drunk people getting married in Vegas by an Elvis impersonator doesn't help either.

Originally posted by Robtard
Which were/are compared to now?

Love and to start a family, as opposed to what I stated in my above post.

Originally posted by Madman_V3N0M
They're the best! They don't care if you're a man or a woman they love you just as much! Best people in the world... True, but not ehy I asked.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Yes it does.

I think the main reason divorce is so common today is because young people get married because they're horny, and then throw in the towel five years later.

And also, celebrities getting married for some extra publicity and drunk people getting married in Vegas by an Elvis impersonator doesn't help either.

Again, you are confusing the then and now... People got married back then more so than now just to have sex, since sex outside of marriage was extremely looked down upon in the 50's.

I do not think either of those qualify due too the very low number of examples. Britney Spears does not justify that statement.

Originally posted by Robtard
Again, you are confusing the then and now... People got married back then more so than now just to have sex since sex outside of marriage was extremely looked down upon in the 50's.

I do not think either of those qualify due too the very low number of examples. Britney Spears does not justify that statement.

Vegas is the wedding capital of the country.

And those 2 examples still add to the percentage.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Love and to start a family, as opposed to what I stated in my above post.

What if a man and woman are in love, but don't want to start a family. Should they be banned from getting married ?

And why do you care? Someone else's romantic life is none of ur fkn business...

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Love and to start a family, as opposed to what I stated in my above post.

Lol. To think they married for love. That's rich. Women were expected to be married by a certain age and stay married. If they got desperate and married a good looking guy who treated them like shit, too bad, divorce wasn't acceptable.

It's because divorce was seen as wrong that there are lower divorce rates in the past.

Originally posted by Mr. Sandman
Lol. To think they married for love. That's rich. Women were expected to be married by a certain age and stay married. If they got desperate and married a good looking guy who treated them like shit, too bad, divorce wasn't acceptable.

It's because divorce was seen as wrong that there are lower divorce rates in the past.

All those "expectations of women" aside, I seriously beleived more people married for love back then.

Marriage has seriosuly gone down the shitter.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
And why do you care? Someone else's romantic life is none of ur fkn business...

Never said it was.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Vegas is the wedding capital of the country.

And those 2 examples still add to the percentage.

Vegas has nothing to do with it, your statement that people get married these days to just have sex is invalid. People are having sex far younger and outside of marriage more so then in the 50's.

Okay, technically they do add, but the percentile number is trivial.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Love and to start a family, as opposed to what I stated in my above post.

actuallt i would like to say that they where more likely pushed into marriage. Because a woman was supposed to have a man back then.
if they didnt get married they where just "fooling around". thats the impression i get bout it.

just like someone above already said.

Originally posted by docb77


One cause CAN have multiple outcomes.



OK rant over.

Then why are you saying that multiple causes have one outcome?

Originally posted by docb77


OK, I'd like to address the people who are calling me an idiot for a moment. Would you like to see a real idiot? LOOK IN THE FREAKIN' MIRROR. You are so closed minded you wouldn't know a valid opinion if it were Labeled as such by a counsel of Scientists. Anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot? Seems to me that that makes you the ignorant ones. You base your facts on a small number of cases of divorce or whatnot. I'm saying that there is plenty more evidence of happy marriages in the past than of troubled ones. I say that Porn contributes to homosexuality, sexual deviancy, and other monstrosities like child abuse. You accuse me of lumping all of those in together. FREAKING IDIOTS. If I wanted to say that Gays were monsters I would have said that. One cause CAN have multiple outcomes.



OK rant over. I didn't call you an idiot. I called you a bigot, which has been pretty clear from your sweeping generalisations about homosexuality, and a fool, which has been pretty clear from the romanticism you have for the days when all women did was cook and clean.

"I say that Porn contributes to homosexuality, sexual deviancy, and other monstrosities like child abuse."
The thing about written parapraxia is that it can't really be covered up. At least after 15 minutes has passed.

Fact: You are lumping these things together. Having stated that to "stamp out" homosexuality one would have to execute all child molesters, you either believe that child molestation causes people to become gay, or that child molesters are intrinsically gay. Both of which are unfounded assertions.

You have no evidence for the multitude of happy marriages in the past. There are numerous reasons the divorce rate and marriage rate were lower and higher respectively in the past and by no means was it because people were oh so much happier.

Oh and if you want to bullshit about brain chemistry, try not to do it when someone who's studied neuroscience is here. Mmkay?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
All those "expectations of women" aside, I seriously beleived more people married for love back then.

And what basis do you have for such a claim ? You are making a wide generalization.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Marriage has seriosuly gone down the shitter.

And what do you care? All that should matter to YOU is YOUR marriage, not someone else's.


Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Never said it was.

So why argue about it ?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
And what basis do you have for such a claim ? You are making a wide generalization.

I said "I believe" not "I know this for a damn fact".

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
And what do you care? All that should matter to YOU is YOUR marriage, not someone else's.

I care for other people. And I'm not telling people how to live their lives.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
So why argue about it ?

Because that's the point of this website; arguing.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I didn't call you an idiot. I called you a bigot, which has been pretty clear from your sweeping generalisations about homosexuality, and a fool, which has been pretty clear from the romanticism you have for the days when all women did was cook and clean.

"I say that Porn contributes to homosexuality, sexual deviancy, and other monstrosities like child abuse."
The thing about written parapraxia is that it can't really be covered up. At least after 15 minutes has passed.

Fact: You are lumping these things together. Having stated that to "stamp out" homosexuality one would have to execute all child molesters, you either believe that child molestation causes people to become gay, or that child molesters are intrinsically gay. Both of which are unfounded assertions.

You have no evidence for the multitude of happy marriages in the past. There are numerous reasons the divorce rate and marriage rate were lower and higher respectively in the past and by no means was it because people were oh so much happier.

Oh and if you want to bullshit about brain chemistry, try not to do it when someone who's studied neuroscience is here. Mmkay?


Excuse me, but...

1- Studies have suggested links between being molested and having various sexual problems later in life - including being gay.

2 - regarding marriage - I have the testimony of 2 sets of granparents, 3 sets of great grandparents, and many of their friends. You on the other hand have nothing but extrapolation of todays problems into yesteryear to suggest that there was a multitude of unhappy marriages.

You studied neuroscience di you? You must have missed a few classes, or maybe you just don't read the journals. The effects of porn addictions on brain chemistry and function are fairly well documented.

Quit BSing about your credentials. And don't call someone a bigot or especially a fool when you're too ignorant to check out the literature yourself.

-edit-

And quit trying to put words in my mouth. Makes you look even more stupid. I never romantized about having women do all the cooking and cleaning. Your own biases against anyone with another opinion are showing loud and clear.

Originally posted by docb77
Excuse me, but...

1- Studies have suggested links between being molested and having various sexual problems later in life - including being gay.

2 - regarding marriage - I have the testimony of 2 sets of granparents, 3 sets of great grandparents, and many of their friends. You on the other hand have nothing but extrapolation of todays problems into yesteryear to suggest that there was a multitude of unhappy marriages.

You studied neuroscience di you? You must have missed a few classes, or maybe you just don't read the journals. The effects of porn addictions on brain chemistry and function are fairly well documented.

Quit BSing about your credentials. And don't call someone a bigot or especially a fool when you're too ignorant to check out the literature yourself.

false facts tying homosexuality to sexual deviency...anectodal evidence to seal the victory. you win the thread. here is your prize: shit

Originally posted by docb77
1- Studies have suggested links between being molested and having various sexual problems later in life - including being gay.


That's true, but it doesn't apply to every gay person.

Originally posted by PVS
false facts tying homosexuality to sexual deviency...anectodal evidence to seal the victory. you win the thread. here is your prize: shit

No thanks, you deserve it, eat it yourself.

Anecdotal evidence is evidence. AS far as "false facts" goes, care to back it up?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
That's true, but it doesn't apply to every gay person.

True, nor does it apply to every molestation victim, the studies suggest it's a factor, not the only cause.

Originally posted by docb77
Excuse me, but...

1- Studies have suggested links between being molested and having various sexual problems later in life - including being gay.

2 - regarding marriage - I have the testimony of 2 sets of granparents, 3 sets of great grandparents, and many of their friends. You on the other hand have nothing but extrapolation of todays problems into yesteryear to suggest that there was a multitude of unhappy marriages.

You studied neuroscience di you? You must have missed a few classes, or maybe you just don't read the journals. The effects of porn addictions on brain chemistry and function are fairly well documented.

Quit BSing about your credentials. And don't call someone a bigot or especially a fool when you're too ignorant to check out the literature yourself.

-edit-

And quit trying to put words in my mouth. Makes you look even more stupid. I never romantized about having women do all the cooking and cleaning. Your own biases against anyone with another opinion are showing loud and clear. Oh please, give me a peer-reviewed article in a reputable journal about the "decline of our moral decency" and divorce rate. Or how more religion will make anything better.

Your anecdotal evidence means nothing to me.

Give me a peer-reviewed article in a reputable journal about how molestation is causative to homosexuality.

Originally posted by docb77
Excuse me, but...

Yes ?

Originally posted by docb77
1- Studies have suggested links between being molested and having various sexual problems later in life - including being gay.

Studies have ALSO shown that Homosexuality is due to a gene which predetermines sexual attractions before they even begin developing during puberty...

You will IGNORE those studies, but pay attention to the studies that support your own bias opinion on the matter....how typical

Originally posted by docb77
2 - regarding marriage - I have the testimony of 2 sets of granparents, 3 sets of great grandparents, and many of their friends. You on the other hand have nothing but extrapolation of todays problems into yesteryear to suggest that there was a multitude of unhappy marriages.

Marriage is only worth as much as the two individuals see it. It is only a human construct. Do you even know the history of marriage? It existed way before Christianity and Islam did....

It is not sacred, there is no proof of it. All we have are the marriages that exist, and the results that are spawned.

Marriage in no way validates a relationship, it only supplies social and economic support to the couple.

It does NOT "make them love each other more" .....or do anything for the relationship that the couple cannot do themselves.

Originally posted by docb77
You studied neuroscience di you? You must have missed a few classes, or maybe you just don't read the journals. The effects of porn addictions on brain chemistry and function are fairly well documented.

SEX ADDICTIONS exist...porn addictions are not proven, although many people have claimed they are in fact addicted to porn.

So what? Are you saying porn is bad? I'd rather be addicted to porn then Crystal Meth...

I'd rather be addicted to PORN than ACTUAL SEX...its way less harmful...


Originally posted by docb77
Quit BSing about your credentials. And don't call someone a bigot or especially a fool when you're too ignorant to check out the literature yourself.


I KNOW you're not addressing me here....

Originally posted by docb77
-edit-


DELETE


Originally posted by docb77
And quit trying to put words in my mouth. Makes you look even more stupid. I never romantized about having women do all the cooking and cleaning. Your own biases against anyone with another opinion are showing loud and clear.


I'll put something else in your mouth droolio LOL j/k

You seem to display biases of your own, especially in the case of homosexuality and/or bisexuality.

Please do not accuse him of being biased, and claim that you are not. It makes you sound like a hypocrit, which I know you do not aim to be.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Studies have ALSO shown that Homosexuality is due to a gene which predetermines sexual attractions before they even begin developing during puberty...

I'll believe that. In my life I've seen 7 and 8 year old kids who are already obviously gay.

Yes. Because being gay is a physical trait.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I'll believe that. In my life I've seen 7 and 8 year old kids who are already obviously gay.

Yes You can tell thier queers from an early age...all young boys who act like girls are totally gay...only macho boys are straight...

Also, you can tell by one easy easy detail: Straight Boys don't cry....the boys who cry are all gay

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Yes You can tell thier queers from an early age...all young boys who act like girls are totally gay...only macho boys are straight...

Also, you can tell by one easy easy detail: Straight Boys don't cry....the boys who cry are all gay

You can cut the sarcasm, ese.

I'm being real.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
You can cut the sarcasm, ese.

I'm being real.
You might be, but you're also being stupid.

Originally posted by Alliance
You might be, but you're also being stupid.


How?

You can tell if a kid's gay. Like if he displays overt gay tendencies and actions.

Not at all. Sexuality is not expressed in physical or emotional traits.

Yes.

People have been able to tell if their son was gay when he was prebubescent,

Originally posted by Alliance
Sexuality is not expressed in physical or emotional traits.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Yes.

People have been able to tell if their son was gay when he was prebubescent,

Perhaps. Its more likely that they guessed based on stupid streoetypes and then happend to be right.

Tis really stupid. Most gays arent flaming annoying.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Oh please, give me a peer-reviewed article in a reputable journal about the "decline of our moral decency" and divorce rate. Or how more religion will make anything better.

Your anecdotal evidence means nothing to me.

Give me a peer-reviewed article in a reputable journal about how molestation is causative to homosexuality.

Go find the sources yourself. I'm not your research intern. I assume you do know how to use pubmed or other journal search engines. Right Mr. Neuroscientist?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen

Studies have ALSO shown that Homosexuality is due to a gene which predetermines sexual attractions before they even begin developing during puberty...

You will IGNORE those studies, but pay attention to the studies that support your own bias opinion on the matter....how typical

If I remember right I think I was the one who brought up the gay fruitflies in the "Is homosexuality genetic" thread.



Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Marriage is only worth as much as the two individuals see it. It is only a human construct. Do you even know the history of marriage? It existed way before Christianity and Islam did....

It is not sacred, there is no proof of it. All we have are the marriages that exist, and the results that are spawned.

Marriage in no way validates a relationship, it only supplies social and economic support to the couple.

It does NOT "make them love each other more" .....or do anything for the relationship that the couple cannot do themselves.
Off topic, but Yes, It did exist before Christianity and Islam. From a religious point of view Adam and Eve were the first married couple. Marriage is a CONTRACT, it is supposed to increase commitment, not feeling.



Originally posted by Lord Urizen
SEX ADDICTIONS exist...porn addictions are not proven, although many people have claimed they are in fact addicted to porn.

So what? Are you saying porn is bad? I'd rather be addicted to porn then Crystal Meth...

I'd rather be addicted to PORN than ACTUAL SEX...its way less harmful... If I had to choose between those things, Yes I'd take the porn addiction too. But, we don't have to choose. We don't have to be addicted to anything if we live right.



Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I'll put something else in your mouth droolio LOL j/k

It better be a gun.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
You seem to display biases of your own, especially in the case of homosexuality and/or bisexuality.

Please do not accuse him of being biased, and claim that you are not. It makes you sound like a hypocrit, which I know you do not aim to be. I never claimed I wasn't. My biases are in broad daylight for all the world to see. The bias I referred to was the broad "I'm right so if you don't agree with me you're wrong" bias that caused him to accuse me of sexism when I'd said nothing of the sort.

Originally posted by Alliance
Perhaps. Its more likely that they guessed based on stupid streoetypes and then happend to be right.

No, their son was just overtly obvious.

Originally posted by docb77
Go find the sources yourself. I'm not your research intern. I assume you do know how to use pubmed or other journal search engines. Right Mr. Neuroscientist?So basically you have none? Except for anecdotal evidence is still evidence? That statement alone tells me you're not of a scientific mind. I'm currently looking through SCOPUS, Medline and PsycINFO. I've yet to find anything to substantiate your claim of sexual abuse as causation of homosexuality, or that people were oh so much happier in the past so divorces were less common.
Originally posted by docb77
Off topic, but Yes, It did exist before Christianity and Islam. From a religious point of view Adam and Eve were the first married couple. Marriage is a CONTRACT, it is supposed to increase commitment, not feeling.If two people need a piece of paper to tell themselves they're committed to each other their marriage isn't going to last anyway.
Originally posted by docb77
If I had to choose between those things, Yes I'd take the porn addiction too. But, we don't have to choose. We don't have to be addicted to anything if we live right.By live right of course you mean live in a manner that's congruous with your religious views.
Originally posted by docb77
I never claimed I wasn't. My biases are in broad daylight for all the world to see. The bias I referred to was the broad "I'm right so if you don't agree with me you're wrong" bias that caused him to accuse me of sexism when I'd said nothing of the sort. I haven't even asserted any of my own opinions, for the most part all I've posted is that your opinions are unfounded, which they are.

Originally posted by docb77
If I had to choose between those things, Yes I'd take the porn addiction too. But, we don't have to choose. We don't have to be addicted to anything if we live right.


This caught my interest... Do you realize that religion can be an addiction just like any other addiction, and when not taken in moderation it can be more harmful than helpful?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
No, their son was just overtly obvious.

Sometimes guesses of one's sexuality are correct. Sometimes they are not. There is no surefire way to know...

Rarely, sometimes a person thinks they are Gay and realizes they are not....likewise, sometimes a person thinks he or she is straight, and later realizes they are not.

Originally posted by Robtard
This caught my interest... Do you realize that religion can be an addiction just like any other addiction, and when not taken in moderation it can be more harmful than helpful?

If porn can be an "addiction," religion can be.

Originally posted by docb77
Excuse me, but...

1- Studies have suggested links between being molested and having various sexual problems later in life - including being gay.

Actually no real link to "being gay" has been found. The "suggested" links only have shown a potential difficulty with intimacy, a predisposistion to powerless sexuality (such as prostitution) or the possibility of pedophilia.

There has never been an study that has provided anything thing like evidence (anecdotal evidence is not considered hard evidence) that molestation is linked to homosexuality. This is especially relevant as the majority of homosexuals come from heterosexual parents of singular averageness - no extremes that homosexuality could be linked to, no abuse mental, physical or sexual. No extreme exposure to pornography or other stimuli. Not divorce or anything else.



Pornography itself is not addictive like drugs or alcohol can be. A porn addict is merely a step away from a sex addict - the pornography itself is not the cause of the addiction but rather the physical/mental stimulation the addict seeks out that they find in pornography. A person can not become a porn addict by watching pornography - the addiction starts in the mind of the person, and is usually present before the actual expression through pornographic viewing emerges.

This is just as with those who posess a self-mutiliation fetish - it is the desire rather then the knife that defines it. They find their release through the medium, the medium itself is not the cause of the fetish/addiction.

This thread should be connected to the other one.jm

Originally posted by docb77
Studies have suggested links between being molested and having various sexual problems later in life - including being gay.



But those people may have become/already been gay in the first place-BEFORE the molestation took place.

What about the molester? If a male molestes a young boy, does the same study reveal whether the molester may have sexual problems in the future, or become homosexual? Why just the victim?

I'm still gay........

*thinks, why did I just have with a man and liked it*

You don't have to tell anyone you liked it, just as long as you tell them you're gay.

p.s. I think you're missing a few words in your last post, might want to edit it.

*thinks, why did I just have SEX with a man and liked it a lot a whole great big bunch*

Is that a freudian thing....lol

I'm talking about the potential word between "Have" and "With"

Or I could be grossly misunderstanding.


EDIT: You got it! And with big, bold capital letters.

What is wrong with me to forget such an important word......

Just for clarification, also something about evolution. Homosexuality and a difference in your chromosomes it's 1 out of about 1000 has a different chromosome but it's more common because it can be influenced. but say 2 Homozygous ("true" breed) Gays, say the both are sperm doners and donate to a Homozygous Straight Person
S = Straight
s = Gay

S S
s |Ss| |Ss|

s |Ss| |Ss|

Most likely they would all be bi or if its a heterozygous (mixed) straight person it would be:

S s
s |Ss| |ss|

s |Ss| |ss|

50% would be gay and 50% bi

The "gene" would exist, but it's Impossible for the gay "gene" to die out, because a chromosome causes it so a chromosome would make the "gene" so it can't die off.

There was this new discovery on aids recently in canada and I thought it would be interesting to see what would happen if they found an aids cure? Would homosexuality be more exceptable? And the answer would be yes, people will act in the manner they want to regardless what is popular. If homosexuality was accepted then people would now be able to choose, but this would have to be taught at an early age.

This would change everything, and people would be more aware and more confused as to what to pick. Well thats what I believe, I could be wrong.

nmind im going to retract my comment..hehe

Originally posted by botankus
That could very well be true, but I often wonder about a few years ('96-'98) where many of the chicks in my hometown were bisexual or gay, and then in '99 and '00 they were all straight again and even had kids and married.

Did you actually go door to door & do a consensus?

OR maybe the chicks in your hometown just didn't want to have sex with you?

I'm just saying it's a very strange observation/comment to make...

an old friend once said to me that men and women are neither st8 nor gay...that at any given point they can change and be whatever they are feeling at that moment.

We all know that mens body parts go with girls, thats a fact. But we cant deny history, its not a new thing; humans having been having sexual experiences for generations... whether we are tolerant well that has more to do with are history.. we go through times where its more acceptable.

watch Caligula (1979)...lol

Originally posted by docb77

1- Studies have suggested links between being molested and having various sexual problems later in life - including being gay.



Were these studies done in the 1900's?
Yes, studies HAVE shown that a person molested as a child & subsequently growing up in a dysfunctional environment may lead to that person molesting in later years...NOT TURN into a homosexual. They were conditioned as a child to accept abuse as natural, a means of power play & dominance through pain.
As homosexuality is among consenting people, where does the abuse factor in?

If a boy was molested/taken advantage by a woman (based on recent cases of female teachers/ guardians having sex with underage students)...does this mean the boy will grow up into the ULTIMATE HETEROSEXUAL???

Being gay ISN'T a sexual problem, it's a consensual way of life.
Gays don't prey on straight people like vampires trying to turn them. It's not sex but religion & narrow minded people that is the problem.

Seriously ask yourself, how is the gay couple living nextdoor a threat to my straight relationship?

Oh thanks God, this old thread really needed to be put to the top again!!!

Besides genetics, another factor for becoming gay is peer pressure.

I noticed that a lot of my straight friends who hang out with their gay friends, eventually become gay themselves.

And no, they were not gay prior to meeting their gay friends.
I grew up with them, and everything we did in the past were everything a guy does.
Y'know, the sex, the beer, the drugs, billiards, etc.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Besides genetics, another factor for becoming gay is peer pressure.

I noticed that a lot of my straight friends who hang out with their gay friends, eventually become gay themselves.
anecdotal evidence for the win.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Besides genetics, another factor for becoming gay is peer pressure.

I noticed that a lot of my straight friends who hang out with their gay friends, eventually become gay themselves.

/facepalm

so you are suggesting homosexuality is contagious...

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
And no, they were not gay prior to meeting their gay friends.
I grew up with them, and everything we did in the past were everything a guy does.
Y'know, the sex, the beer, the drugs, billiards, etc.

its funny how oblivious to the massive ignorance contained in these sentences you are. You are so sure of yourself, but literally every sentence is just so much fail...

ie "gayification"

I'm not lying though.

After I found out he became gay, I stopped communicating with that person.

Not that I am sexist toward gay people.
I just don't wanna become a gay.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
I'm not lying though.

After I found out he became gay, I stopped communicating with that person.

Not that I am sexist toward gay people.
I just don't wanna become a gay.

What if some of his gayness already soaked in and is slowly growing inside you?

Maybe you should watch some hardcore gay man-on-man porn and see if you get aroused, that way you can take measures. Better hurry, could be too late already.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
I'm not lying though.

After I found out he became gay, I stopped communicating with that person.

Not that I am sexist toward gay people.
I just don't wanna become a gay.

What??

It would surprise you that if you were to enter a gay club you would find more st8 acting guys then guys that seem gay. My brother in law is like you, very close minded; if you were truely secure about yourself you wouldnt care whether to be seen with a gay guy.

http://i1039.photobucket.com/albums/a479/scottwooledge/672dbe07.jpg

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
I'm not lying though.

nobody accused you of lying, we just think you are ignorant and a little bit hateful

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
I'm not lying though.

After I found out he became gay, I stopped communicating with that person.

Not that I am sexist toward gay people.
I just don't wanna become a gay.

Why stop communicating with him? All you have to do is tell him you are not gay, he will leave you alone. Unless he's a a$$hole, why stop communication with him?

he thinks homosexuality is contagious and is homophobic to the point where, if it turned out he were gay, it would ruin his life