Prop 8?

@Lightwizard,

Any plonker can assert that somebody is ignorant about the mechanisms of evolution. You cannot lose an argument like that.

It's an empty plastic bag. Selling them is considered ungentlemanly. But there's nothing wrong with it from an evolutionary point of view. Anything you get away with is okay then.

It is a symptom of floundering.

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

I did that weeks ago as far as telling them I would be writing checks and to be sure to update their blacklist to include my name on their website forum.

It is the kind of honor similar to being on the Nixon enemies list as a matter of fact.

As their real power is near zero it is also a lot safety to be on that list also. then the Nixon lst.

Second I am sure that the two APA annual meetings that was overrun by gay Protesters had zero to do with the change of heart or the meetings they held with the protesters were all concerning science before they announce the delisting.

And of course the incoming president of the APA who was an in the closet homosexual at the time also was a clear eye scientist concerning the matter.

The fact that APA have set up a standing committee consisting of both it members and gay right movement members is what any unbiased scientific body would also do.

TKO you are so right there is no reason at all to question the APA delisting was base on anything but science,

1 Reply

@spendius,

You already have enough empty plastic bags, ready to fill with more BS, so there's no need to hard sell you any more.

How can one have "an evolutionary point of view" if they know practically nothing about the subject?

Now that's floundering -- all ready to batter up and deep fry.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

I did that weeks ago as far as telling them I would be writing checks and to be sure to update their blacklist to include my name on their website forum.

But no checks yet?

BillRM wrote:

It is the kind of honor similar to being on the Nixon enemies list as a matter of fact.

how do figure? Because you are trying to be someone's enemy and in this case oppressor? The people on Nixon's list weren't oppressing Nixon.

BillRM wrote:

As their real power is near zero it is also a lot safety to be on that list also. then the Nixon lst.

Yeah, cause the point of the list is a mark of shame. If you find no shame in oppressing gays, go ahead and be proud. The point is for those who contributed to be known as doing such. Transparency.

BillRM wrote:

Second I am sure that the two APA annual meetings that was overrun by gay Protesters had zero to do with the change of heart or the meetings they held with the protesters were all concerning science before they announce the delisting.

Yeah, and the listing would have stood had it been based on real science. However, the APA knew it could not continue to list it given what they knew from researching it.

They knew gays weren't sociopaths and knew they couldn't prove they were.

BillRM wrote:

And of course the incoming president of the APA who was an in the closet homosexual at the time also was a clear eye scientist concerning the matter.

One man that was gay... That's what you got? Still plenty of others that weren't. He'd have to be pretty convincing...

BillRM wrote:

The fact that APA have set up a standing committee consisting of both it members and gay right movement members is what any unbiased scientific body would also do.

Yeah, who would understand homosexuality better than homosexuals...

BillRM wrote:

TKO you are so right

Thank you.
K
O

2 Replies

@Diest TKO,

I heard somebody asking for an evolutionary explanation for homosexuality, so I am here to provide.

The mistake that most people make when thinking about evolution is that it occurs at the level of the individual organism. It doesn't. It occurs at the level of the gene. And sometimes it is beneficial for a gene to sacrifice the organism to save other genes.

This is a drastically oversimplified example, but it gets the point of cross. Imagine that homosexuality is controlled by a single, recessive gene, so you need two copies to be a homosexual. If you only get one, you are straight. A homosexual then, would be relatively rare in the population, but could survive without reproducing themselves. Instead, they would contribute to the survival odds of the gene in those around them, who only carry a single copy of the gene, thus increasing the odds that they survive and successfully reproduce. As long as they are able to do this for 3 individuals, it actually does better than if they just took care of themselves, because 3 copies of the gene are being cared for instead of just two, and three individuals with the gene are reproducing the gene in their offspring instead of just the one.

Again, this is a drastic oversimplification, but it's useful nonetheless, and should clear up how such a genetic predisposition could propogate.

1 Reply

@fungotheclown,

Yes and that is why incest is not a good idea as then you get two copies of whatever recessive genes that might be in your family blood line in the offsprings.

As such genes can be very bad and yet not normally breed out rapidly for the reason you gave.

3 Replies

@Diest TKO,

They knew gays weren't sociopaths and knew they couldn't prove they were.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does having a sexual disorder of any kind have to do with being a sociopath?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Does the collective have any right to attempt to keep the gene pool free from genetic defects? I want to get back to that question because we seem to have decided that the answer is no, that individual rights trumps the best interests of the collective, that the collective has no choice but to allow genetically defective individuals to make copies of the defect into the next generation, no matter what the cost of providing for the handicapped individuals is.

Nobody in their right mind would go so far as the Nazi's, but having a bio baby of your own is not a right that all individuals should be able to demand regardless of the cost to others. I think is matters a lot of homosexuality is caused fully or in part by genetic coding.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Your argument of the genetic basis of sexual orientation breeding out is flawed. Your argument would be true given the assumption that the only time the recessive gene is passed on is when it is passed on and combined with another recessive gene. The simple fact of the matter is that like most recessive genes, the majority are not shown in the population because they must first combine with a similar genome. Case in point: blue eyes. A child can be born with blue eyes when neither parent possesses blue eyes. The trait can be traced back sometimes four or five generations before a case of blue eyes occurs.

Your argument would also hold true if the family had only one child. However, since the average family size has been around 4 for the past twenty years (two children and two adults) it is safe to say that, even if both parents were carriers at least one child would more than likely become a "carrier" of the recessive trait.

Finally, equating incest to homosexuality ultimately shows how little you actually understand about homosexuality and represents the underlying cause for ignorance in our society towards the homosexual community.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

They knew gays weren't sociopaths and knew they couldn't prove they were.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does having a sexual disorder of any kind have to do with being a sociopath?

Why do I waste my time with you Bill...

Wait! I guess you must be joking around here. Anyone who knows as much as you about the APA removing homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses, surely would know that homosexuality was cataloged as a form of sociopathic behavior. I'm sure you already knew that though. I mean you are so informed about the subject and all.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Wow Bill. So did you notice how your example tries to relate incest and homosexuality, then ironically tells us how they produce the opposite effect on genes.

If incest double the likelyhood of a special gene that produces a bad mutation then homosexuals would also double the chance th--

Wait, when homosexuals breed, they still breed with the opposite sex... How would they be doubling their special gene...?

I already knew you didn't pay attention to anyone's argument, but to find that you don't even pay attention to your own argument... bravo.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Does the collective have any right to attempt to keep the gene pool free from genetic defects?

Nope.

hawkeye10 wrote:

I want to get back to that question because we seem to have decided that the answer is no, that individual rights trumps the best interests of the collective, that the collective has no choice but to allow genetically defective individuals to make copies of the defect into the next generation, no matter what the cost of providing for the handicapped individuals is.

The collective has no choice, because the collective is not a part of the decision making of individuals in the first place. A couple where one has diabetes should have the right to have children, and furthe6r, they should never be asked to earn or prove that either.

How are homosexuals "genetically defective?" They seem to function just fine. This is not an issue of cost to the "collective" either. The collective includes gays, and they pay in too.

hawkeye10 wrote:

Nobody in their right mind would go so far as the Nazi's, but having a bio baby of your own is not a right that all individuals should be able to demand regardless of the cost to others.

Sure it is. If you wish to have a child, you should be able to. I may disapprove of those huge 17 children families, but I know they have the right to make their family as they wish.

hawkeye10 wrote:

I think is matters a lot of homosexuality is caused fully or in part by genetic coding.

It doesn't.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

They surely do not function just fine when it come to breeding.

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

Wait! I guess you must be joking around here. Anyone who knows as much as you about the APA removing homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses, surely would know that homosexuality was cataloged as a form of sociopathic behavior. I'm sure you already knew that though. I mean you are so informed about the subject and all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you care to give a link to that claim of your?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Wait! I guess you must be joking around here. Anyone who knows as much as you about the APA removing homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses, surely would know that homosexuality was cataloged as a form of sociopathic behavior. I'm sure you already knew that though. I mean you are so informed about the subject and all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you care to give a link to that claim of your?

No problem. In fact, this will be the SECOND time I've given it to you. I gues you never read Hooker's findings the first time I posted them. This is a very embarrassing evening for you.

http://www.psychologymatters.org/hooker.html

Practical Application

Quote:

In conjunction with other empirical results, this work led the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the DSM in 1973 (it had been listed as a sociopathic personality disorder). In 1975, the American Psychological Association publicly supported this move, stating that "homosexuality per se implies no impairment in judgment, reliability or general social and vocational capabilities…(and mental health professionals should) take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness long associated with homosexual orientation." Although prejudice and stigma still exist in society, this research has helped millions of gay men and women gain acceptance in the mental health community.

You wouldn't have to embarrass yourself like this if you'd read these things the first time I post them.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

They surely do not function just fine when it come to breeding.

That doesn't mean that they are genetically defective. It means there genes govern differently.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

It was good propaganda to try to imply that the DMS was listing homosexuals as sociopaths too bad it did not work out for you.

Having a listing under sociopathic personality disturbance is not the same as being a sociopath as in the common meaning of that term.

Good try but medical terms do not have a one to one relationship with normal words meaning as we both know.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Sorry but having a sociopathic personality disturbance is not the same as being a sociopath as in the common meaning of that term.

Good try but medical terms do not have a one to one relationship with normal word meaning as we both know.

Care to provide a link? And as for hashing terms, the one you use above is not what I nor the Hooker research uses. What are you trying to pull?

T
K
O

2 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Care to provide a link
-----------------------------------------------------------
Try entering the term sociopathic personality disturbance in google and you will get 5000 hits and add homosexuality and dms and the number will be reduce to a few hundreds.

You gentlemen and ladies was listed as a sub-groups under that term until 1968 in the DMS.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

You know TKO you would love to play words games however homosexuality is just a sexual disorder in the same manner as any other condition that interfere with the normal working of the reproduce systems of a human being.

No more and no less then say a condition that does not allow the eggs of a woman to fasten to the walls of her womb or for a man to produce live sperm cells.

Not a moral problem or a religious issue and also a very very strange thing to build a civil right movement or a whole sub culture around.

Of course deaf people for example do similar things.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know