Calif.'s Top Court Blocks Gay Marriages

[CrazyLiberal]

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993008

http://www.bol.ucla.edu/~kmayeda/HC92/hc92.html

http://www.spub.ksu.edu/issues/v099b/sp/n113/opn-kevyn-03.06.95.html

 

[jimnyc]

Born Gay? – Not So Fast Say Homosexual Researchers!

Washington, DC – A trio of psychologists associated with the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) have just published a startling report that debunks one of the major foundations of the homosexual movement: That homosexuals are "born gay." The report quotes noted "gay" scientists as well as "gay" philosophers who openly admit there is no research proving there is a "gay gene" or "gay brain."

From the faulty premise that homosexuals are born that way, flow a number of other equally flawed assumptions. Two of these are: That society must encourage and protect individuals who think they were "born gay"; and that those who oppose homosexual behaviour are mentally unstable (homophobic) and are trying to force homosexuals to deny their genetic destinies.

"The Innate-Immutable Argument Finds No Basis in Science," by Drs. A. Dean Byrd, Shirley Cox, and Jeffrey W. Robinson, quotes one of the most vocal homosexual researchers Dean Hamer who noted: "Homosexuality is not purely genetic " environmental factors play a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay. . . . I don't think we will ever be able to predict who will be gay."

Homosexual researcher Simon LeVay who studied hypothalmic differences between the brains of heterosexuals and homosexuals, has noted: "I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay centre in the brain."

Camille Paglia, a lesbian activist has had the courage to boldly state what most homosexuals refuse to admit: "Homosexuality is not 'normal.' On the contrary, it is a challenge to the norm" Nature exists whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction "No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous "homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait".

Homosexual activists, of course, claim that their behaviour is "normal" and that's why the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a Gender Identity Disorder in 1973. What they fail to admit, however, is that homosexual activists literally terrorized the APA into removing homosexuality as a disorder. Homosexual scientist Simon LeVay admits this. He notes: "Gay activism was clearly the force that propelled the APA to declassify homosexuality."

Whether homosexual behaviour is normal and genetic is a significant issue under debate in American culture today. Congress is stampeding to pass "hate crime" and "non-discrimination" laws providing special rights for homosexuals; school textbook writers are producing pro-homosexual materials for elementary school children; Hollywood is openly promoting homosexuality and cross-dressing; and liberal church leaders are blessing homosexual "unions"—all under the false premise that homosexuality is a positive, normal, and genetically-based lifestyle.

Our lawmakers, media elites, school officials, and church leaders would do well to study the scholarly research provided by NARTH (www.narth.com) on this important social movement—before they continue to homosexualize our culture—and to punish those who oppose homosexual behaviour as a sexual perversion and sin.

http://www.albatrus.org/english/potpourri/homosex/born_gay_not_so_fast.htm

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993008

http://www.bol.ucla.edu/~kmayeda/HC92/hc92.html

http://www.spub.ksu.edu/issues/v099b/sp/n113/opn-kevyn-03.06.95.html

1- A study on sheep.
2- No evidence
3- Opinion column, here's a direct quote - "I don't pretend to be a scientific expert. I am just an interested layperson with some subjective insight into the subject of homosexuality."

I hope you aren't resting your case with those links.

 

[CrazyLiberal]

http://www.geocities.com/southbeach/boardwalk/7151/biobasis.html

I think that homosexuality in animals (such as goats) is very important, because you can't tell me they grew up in a homosexual enviroment or that they made a concious choice to be homosexual.

 

[Bullypulpit]

...Of why same gender couples should be permitted to marry.

An individual had been caring for his partner of 15 years. This individual was dying of metastatic bone cancer. As his condition grew worse and worse, his partner had to take more and more time off work to care for him.

He died last week, peacefully and without pain. The next day, his partner was fired from his job for excessive abscences. Had they been permitted to marry, the Family Medical Leave Act would have protected his job, his benefits, his financial security. But no, he couldn't claim FMLA because of stupid, short-sighted and ignorant government policies.

There is no proof of harm to society arising from permitting the marriage of same gender couples. There is no rational, valid argument for prohibiting such unions.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
...Of why same gender couples should be permitted to marry.

An individual had been caring for his partner of 15 years. This individual was dying of metastatic bone cancer. As his condition grew worse and worse, his partner had to take more and more time off work to care for him.

He died last week, peacefully and without pain. The next day, his partner was fired from his job for excessive abscences. Had they been permitted to marry, the Family Medical Leave Act would have protected his job, his benefits, his financial security. But no, he couldn't claim FMLA because of stupid, short-sighted and ignorant government policies.

There is no proof of harm to society arising from permitting the marriage of same gender couples. There is no rational, valid argument for prohibiting such unions.

Maybe a good argument for civil unions but not for marriage.

 

[OCA]

I'm willing to go for civil unions if sexual orientation is taken out as a minority status and they give up any claims to taxpayer money causes.

 

[Bullypulpit]

...If civil unions impart all of the same rights and responsibilities of marriage, why not call it marriage?

My wife and I were joined in a civil ceremony before a judge. Is it a marriage or a civil union?

 

[jimnyc]

...If civil unions impart all of the same rights and responsibilities of marriage, why not call it marriage?

Because marriage is a contract between a man and a woman. Heterosexuals don't want to lower the value of something that has been around for thousands of years.

Why are civil unions not acceptable to gays?

My wife and I were joined in a civil ceremony before a judge. Is it a marriage or a civil union?

Since you are a hetrosexual it is recognized as a marriage by the government but not by most religious institutions.

 

[OCA]

In that case I will revert back to muy original stance, no civil unions and no marriage unless all minority status is given up and any usage of taxpayer money by them. Which they won't do because they love their precious parades.