Gay marriage legal in Massachussetts

[OCA]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Being gay is due to hormone levels in utero during certain points during gestation. It's not a choice. It's not definitely genetic, but it is developmental.

Choke on that, haters.

Theory and supposition again Mr. liberal. Sorry but the burden of proof lies with your side not ours. Thanks again and better luck next time playing homosexual apologies!

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Plus, their brains are more feminized/masculinized due to hormones exposure in utero. Not to dismiss your environmental factors, but this is a BIG DEAL.

RWA where is your unarguable, set in stone, disproveable facts. Oh sorry they don't exist except in somebody's personal opinion column. Thanks again, better luck next time.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
Theory and supposition again Mr. liberal. Sorry but the burden of proof lies with your side not ours. Thanks again and better luck next time playing homosexual apologies!

the internet is replete with similar studies and similar conclusions.

http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/RootWeb/npr_letters_on_the_biological_ba.htm

"Two lines of evidence suggest that sexual orientation is influenced by innate processes: neuroendocrine (including neuroanatomical) and genetic studies. Neuroendocrine theories are more fully developed and have spurred far more research. At the same time, however, cumulative empirical support for neuroendocrine influences is perhaps more tenuous than that for genetic influences. "


I'm just wondering, oca, are you going to do your idiot monkey routine for us today? That's a good one.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
and RWA delivers a stunning uppercut to his opponents.

Question: doesn't something have to be factual in order to be an uppercut? Or are we all giving in to theory and supposition in order to be seen as "PC"?

Reminder being gay will be assumed to be a lifestyle choice until proven otherwise. They've been trying for decades to prove otherwise, hasn't happened yet so logic would take you to my side.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
RWA where is your unarguable, set in stone, disproveable facts. Oh sorry they don't exist except in somebody's personal opinion column. Thanks again, better luck next time.

Act 1 in the "Idiot Monkey Routine".

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
Question: doesn't something have to be factual in order to be an uppercut? Or are we all giving in to theory and supposition in order to be seen as "PC"?

Reminder being gay will be assumed to be a lifestyle choice until proven otherwise. They've been trying for decades to prove otherwise, hasn't happened yet so logic would take you to my side.

Act II. The monkey gets edgy, and tries in vain to solve complications.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
the internet is replete with similar studies and similar conclusions.

http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/RootWeb/npr_letters_on_the_biological_ba.htm

"Two lines of evidence suggest that sexual orientation is influenced by innate processes: neuroendocrine (including neuroanatomical) and genetic studies. Neuroendocrine theories are more fully developed and have spurred far more research. At the same time, however, cumulative empirical support for neuroendocrine influences is perhaps more tenuous than that for genetic influences. "


I'm just wondering, oca, are you going to do your idiot monkey routine for us today? That's a good one.

Do I need to explain the differences to you in set in stone facts and personal opinion?

RWA come with your guns loaded or don't come at all. You're making yourself look worse than usual.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by OCA
Question: doesn't something have to be factual in order to be an uppercut? Or are we all giving in to theory and supposition in order to be seen as "PC"?

Reminder being gay will be assumed to be a lifestyle choice until proven otherwise. They've been trying for decades to prove otherwise, hasn't happened yet so logic would take you to my side.

all points of view on being gay are theory at this point. we've already seen that in some cases people have said they are gay because they were molested, I've already disproven that.

-=d=- has it right when he said 'gay is as gay does'. so far theres theory based on scientific evidence that can give credence to that burgeoning theory.

 

[OCA]

Act III- I yet again wipe New Age's ass all over USMB for the hundredth time.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
all points of view on being gay are theory at this point. we've already seen that in some cases people have said they are gay because they were molested, I've already disproven that.

-=d=- has it right when he said 'gay is as gay does'. so far theres theory based on scientific evidence that can give credence to that burgeoning theory.

Nope, all points of view are not theory and supposition. Until someone can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is not a choice for whatever reason it will remain a dangerous and reckless lifestyle choice.

Now somebody please prove how a guy fucking another guy in the ass is natural and normal.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
Act III- I yet again wipe New Age's ass all over USMB for the hundredth time.

Please use the double quilted, ass servant.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
Nope, all points of view are not theory and supposition. Until someone can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is not a choice for whatever reason it will remain a dangerous and reckless lifestyle choice.

Now somebody please prove how a guy fucking another guy in the ass is natural and normal.

I'm oca. I think using more words and acting like a low class bigot makes me more right.

 

[OCA]

Anybody ever hear of the time RWA hit on Aquarian our openly gay member? LMAO! I'm guessing that RWA likes to suck cock and rim assholes, whadda y'all think?

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
I'm oca. I think using more words and acting like a low class bigot makes me more right.

I'm RWA and I think discriminating against minorities is cool. I also believe that if I can get people to falsely believe OCA discriminates against whites I can deflect attention away from my agreements with D and Willie on race.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
Anybody ever hear of the time RWA hit on Aquarian our openly gay member? LMAO! I'm guessing that RWA likes to suck cock and rim assholes, whadda y'all think?

He just seemed like a chick, for some reason. Maybe I picked up on his gayness. I'm not ashamed, it was a mistake. You got something else? That's pathetic monkey man. Are you sure you don't believe in evolution? It may be your only hope for improvement.

 

[dmp]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
I'm oca. I think using more words and acting like a low class bigot makes me more right.

hah.

:-/

He's got a point. The point is: Homosexuals want acceptence for their behaviour. Pedophiles want acceptence for their behaviour. Murders want acceptence for their behaviour. Con-Men want acceptence for thiers. Liars for theirs.

Instead of simply stating "We love a cock in our anus", they cry that they are 'victims' of their genetics - which has NO basis in scientific or biological fact. To allow one's PREFERED method of obtaining sexual pleasure should be condoned or supported is ridiculous. I'd wager those who practice beastiality can argue that since their dog humps their leg, it's offering consent for the human to hump back.

Slippery slope when we stop drawing lines.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by OCA
Nope, all points of view are not theory and supposition. Until someone can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is not a choice for whatever reason it will remain a dangerous and reckless lifestyle choice.

Now somebody please prove how a guy fucking another guy in the ass is natural and normal.

why did you not pay any attention to what it is I really posted?

For one, homosexuality isn't any more reckless and dangerous than a heterosexual promiscuous lifestyle.

For two, homosexuality as a choice is as much a theory and unprovable as hormonal utero development is. Theres more science to side the scale on utero development though.

Three, if you need to have it shown to you beyond a shadow of a doubt, how can you lay claim to choice being the total proof you need?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
I'm RWA and I think discriminating against minorities is cool. I also believe that if I can get people to falsely believe OCA discriminates against whites I can deflect attention away from my agreements with D and Willie on race.

Nope. I'm the one against discrimination, you're for it. Affirmative action is racial discrimination. You support it. Denial ain't just a river in egypt, monkeyTumor.

 

[dmp]

btw - this thread is now a bitching match..and it sucks.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
why did you not pay any attention to what it is I really posted?

For one, homosexuality isn't any more reckless and dangerous than a heterosexual promiscuous lifestyle.

For two, homosexuality as a choice is as much a theory and unprovable as hormonal utero development is. Theres more science to side the scale on utero development though.

Three, if you need to have it shown to you beyond a shadow of a doubt, how can you lay claim to choice being the total proof you need?

He's a f$cking idiot, that's how.