Your own research, huh. Again, I will bank of the professionals in this case. If you don't care to research the professionals but quote some nebulous "my research" without any references to just what studies are involved, I discount completely your conjecture. Especially as you don't even know how to spell innate.
Lightwizard, do you ever get really, really tired of all this? I would. <sigh>
I have the patience of Job some say but like the cat playing with the mouse, I do eventually get tired of the game. We should let those who read garbage research put out by religious institutions (and I do mean institutions) and actually believe it to their own wiles. An idle mind might be the workshop of the Devil, but the half-idle mind is the worshop of the church. I guess it does proof that of Bush's "children left behind" (of which he is one of them).
<sigh> Well, it would drive me nuts! You should get some sort of anendurance prize for this! I'm outraged: all these threds that basically require folk to justify their lives, who they are ...! Honestly!Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
Lightwizard wrote:I guess it does proof that of Bush's "children left behind" (of which he is one of them).
What's the difference between left behind and right behind
If your mind is narrow enough, you can squeeze ahead.
Lightwizard wrote:Your own research, huh. Again, I will bank of the professionals in this case. If you don't care to research the professionals but quote some nebulous "my research" without any references to just what studies are involved, I discount completely your conjecture. Especially as you don't even know how to spell innate.
Way to ignore my entire post.
I suppose I should just accept that you are right because you say so.
Lightwizard wrote:Your own research, huh. Again, I will bank of the professionals in this case. If you don't care to research the professionals but quote some nebulous "my research" without any references to just what studies are involved, I discount completely your conjecture. Especially as you don't even know how to spell innate.
Way to ignore my entire post.
I suppose I should just accept that you are right because you say so.
Where is the evidence that sexuality is innate, and further that 'the majority of medical professionals' believe this?
preemptively, to your anticipated re-iteration of 'prove it is not innate' I will quote myself. (as it is not clear that you are actually reading/absorbing anything I have been saying)
Quote:
I have already stated some reasons why I think sexuality is not inate. I will re-itterate:
If homosexuality was genetic, the gene (or gene sequence) would/should have died out long ago due to not being passed on. Yet gay people exist.
If sexual preference were inate, what would account for the wide variety of sexual preferences/fetishes that exist?
Your hypothesis simply does not seem to fit the evidence.
Jesus, I cant keep up with you people. You put out some serious material,
Wolf, your arguments that homosexuality is not/is a disorder is very much argued, and there are two strongly opposing sides. There is evidence that it is caused by excessive andosterone levels in the womb, nurture etc. I would still emphasise the key point of this thread, that it is NOT a choice.
Phoenix, That statement about couples who dont want children is tripe. Observe:A gay does not choose this, so it must be a fault in himself - a disorder. He has NOT HAD A CHOICE. Someone who chooses to smoke and thus kills himself did not have a disorder - he chose to kill himself.
Homosexuallity has never been natures way of controlling populations - that'd be disease, predators, lack of food etc. Nature obeys the law of natural selection. Being gay is selected against.
Montana, whatever. How bout we sterilise people. That sounds great. Millions of unwanted and starving children is just life. You cant fix it by increasing the number of gays. Oh, and form your own arguments, instead of saying "yeah, what she/he said". And living well is a crap revenge. If someone wastes your family, does living well really cut it?
Doctor S, its about time this thread had someone like you in it. Homosexuality would remove its-self as you say. It is true or not that homosexuality is curable? because you would know more of this than I, (or wizard for that matter). Wizard doesnt know nuts, he is defending himself to the bitter end, not because he is right, but because accepting he is wrong would hurt to much.
Quote:
Doctor S, its about time this thread had someone like you in it. Homosexuality would remove its-self as you say. It is true or not that homosexuality is curable? because you would know more of this than I, (or wizard for that matter). Wizard doesnt know nuts, he is defending himself to the bitter end, not because he is right, but because accepting he is wrong would hurt to much.
Cureable? Interesting choice of words.
I really don't know. Some people stick with one preference their whole life..others experiment and develop new fetishes/preferences, while losing interest in old ones.
I think the divide between hetero/homo sexuality is largely a social construct.
I also put all forms of (concentual) sex on the same playing field.
It seems to be the norm for the 'pro gay' crowd to argue for the innateness of homosexuality, while the 'antigay' crowd to argue it is a learned behavior. When I state that I don't think sexuality is innate, many (like our darling lightwizard here) make a lot of unwarranted assumptions. I am not 'antigay' although I am not attracted to other men.
Doctor S, why is it that you think that homosexuality is not innate?
I'd like to look at your thinking that led to that conclusion.
Ok, I'm officially staying away from this thread, this is disgusting.
Eryemil wrote:Ok, I'm officially staying away from this thread, this is disgusting.
I don't blame you one bit, Eryemil.
Meh, we kinda get our revenge by starting threads asking religious people to justify their beliefs and the existence of God.
Well, the sad thing is that many that have posted here are not even religious so they can't blame their blidness on that. :wink:
Eryemil wrote:Well, the sad thing is that many that have posted here are not even religious so they can't blame their blidness on that. :wink:
Perhaps its social conditioning. People around them are homophobic, so their homophobic tendencies may kinda rub off on them.
Exactly -- I think the poor spelling and grammar has also rubbed off on them. Must be a trailer park thing. They are poster boys for Bush's no child left behind.
No, just incredulous.
I do know about pecans, however.
Just so I'm clear on this - those who question about whether or not gayness is all innate or a matter of choice - those people are homophobes and blind, right?
