@snood,
You conveniently failed to quote an actually
cogent line from my post
Quote:Maybe Gayness is a genetic trait or maybe not.
It was this question to which the rest of my comments referred.
In fact I led my comments with
Quote:I couldn't care less what some one's sexual urges are focused upon as long as they require consenting adults, and not innocents, unwilling or otherwise.
Rabid racism that!
In point of fact I did ignore the ensuing comments of those who, reflexively bristling at anything that might be perceived as negative in regards to Gays, created a straw man from my post against which they could launch their self-righteous protests.
The question of "choice" was actually raised by you in your opening post
Quote:Here’s another one: One controversy that seems to come up every so often is about whether sexual orientation is a choice or totally inborn – genetic. So as not to give the oppressors and “anti” forces any leeway, I generally side with those who say it is not a choice.
But I still have questions.
My response was clear (albeit not to my detractors)...Who cares?
The mere fact that you feel compelled to answer this question in a manner that is not truthful (so as to not afford "leeway" to the "oppressors") indicates how politicized a question it is for you.
You have your self-expressed doubts though. Does that make you an "oppressor?"
Apparently you feel that you have earned a dispensation on this issue. Anyone else who expresses the belief that sexual orientation is a choice is an "oppressor" or a member of the
"anti" forces.
No, snood can muse where lesser mortals fear to tread because he's one of the cadre; his bonafides are unquestionable.
I don't know what the answer is, but I suspect that it some cases its genetic and in others its choice, but the bottom line is I don't care, and other than as a biological puzzle I don't know why anyone who isn't thoroughly devoted to the politicization of the Gay experience would.
Again, the Gay population is at most 10% of Americans. This hardly constitutes a burning question that affects every household in the country.
That they are only 10% or less has nothing to do with whether they are entitled to civil rights, and despite the conclusion you and your confreres immediately jumped to, I never indicated it did.
The fact of the matter is that the question is truly only important because its answer somehow marks the answerer as tolerant or homophobic. Genetics is the politically correct answer because it serves the Gay Rights movement's desire to depict homosexuality as "normal."
I never could really understand this position.
There are any number of harmful genetic mutations that passed on from parent to child and few people consider them a sign of "normalcy."
In addition, if I choose to have a homosexual relationship, does that make me any less deserving of equal rights?
Hollywood is disproportionately supportive of the Gay Rights Movement. There's nothing inherently wrong with this, but being who they are they can't resist pushing their opinions on the rest of the country via popular cultural. As a result, we have a disproportionate number of gay characters appearing in TV shows and movies, to the point where despite the fact that a Gay/Lesbian group puts the percentage of homosexuals at between 5% and 8%, the American people when polled answer it is around 25%.
Once again, it has nothing to do with whether or not gays deserve civil rights but it is clearly propaganda and propaganda irks me.
The Gay Rights Movement strives to manipulate the American people. I understand why they do and if it works, good on them, but I'm going to call manipulation when I see it.
You on the other hand, swallow it hook, line and sinker because you are desperate to be cool, and being a liberal is cool.
As a result all sorts of liberal reprobates are given free passes on their transgressions. Bill Maher is permitted to call women cunts, and David Letterman is permitted to make jokes about a young girl getting knocked up under the bleachers by a Yankee third baseman.
Roman Polanksy's art trumps his rape of a minor, and Steve Jobs could dodge taxes and exploit Chinese workers.
Barrack Obama obliterates Yemeni terrorist and their families from several thousand feet in the air and he's tough, while George Bush allowed waterboarding, and he's a monster.
The examples go on and on.
You're cool snood so you get to muse on whether not homosexuality is hereditary while I, pointing out the question is immaterial except in the context of politics am a rabid racist.
Don't misunderstand me, I'm not complaining about fairness. I'm simply trying to point out what a shallow, hypocritical tool you are.
I'm glad someone liked it.
); and I married into a family of teachers.
