I Was Right All Along! Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay or Transgender

[martybegan]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

And Religious Freedom isn't?

Religious freedom is fine....but religious freedom doesn't mean that a religion can control others thru our secular laws.

How is having to spend 5 minutes going to another baker "controlling"?

It goes back to the argument of tolerance vs. acceptance.

 

[OldLady]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

Yeah, but if it's by choice, they can strong arm and torture the homosexual into giving up his evil ways.

 

[bodecea]

How so? Convenient to NOT ignore studies on identical twins and that 40% figure?

Have you actually provided proof of what you claim? I haven't seen any therefor your claims are actually baseless and irrelevant.

Gay Men in Twin Study

According to the 1991 report, my 40% was too low.

 

[bodecea]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

Yeah, but if it's by choice, they can strong arm and torture the homosexual into giving up his evil ways.

Like they used to do to lefthanded people....using religion for an excuse then too.

 

[beautress]

How so? Convenient to NOT ignore studies on identical twins and that 40% figure?

Have you actually provided proof of what you claim? I haven't seen any therefor your claims are actually baseless and irrelevant.

Gay Men in Twin Study

According to the 1991 report, my 40% was too low.

If gayness were shown by a % in DNA, it wouldn't be lower than 98%, imho. The fact that one study shows 40% and another shows 55% may reflect a glaring difference, but that difference would not be in line with only a 2% chance of gene crossover following conception as the body is shuffling its cards and getting ready for life on the other side of the uterus. There probably is a reason for the difference, it's just not DNA as I understand it.

 

[martybegan]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

Yeah, but if it's by choice, they can strong arm and torture the homosexual into giving up his evil ways.

Kind of like forcing someone to bake a cake, take a picture, or make a floral arrangement OR ELSE!

 

[martybegan]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

Yeah, but if it's by choice, they can strong arm and torture the homosexual into giving up his evil ways.

Like they used to do to lefthanded people....using religion for an excuse then too.

Actually today's thing would be government forcing stores to stock left handed scissors and notebooks.

 

[Hossfly]

How so? Convenient to NOT ignore studies on identical twins and that 40% figure?

Have you actually provided proof of what you claim? I haven't seen any therefor your claims are actually baseless and irrelevant.

Gay Men in Twin Study

According to the 1991 report, my 40% was too low.

If gayness were shown by a % in DNA, it wouldn't be lower than 98%, imho. The fact that one study shows 40% and another shows 55% may reflect a glaring difference, but that difference would not be in line with only a 2% chance of gene crossover following conception as the body is shuffling its cards and getting ready for life on the other side of the uterus. There probably is a reason for the difference, it's just not DNA as I understand it.

Faggots will argue that some animals are homosexual. I contend that if some people are homosexual then it stands to reason they are animals too.

 

[mdk]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

Yeah, but if it's by choice, they can strong arm and torture the homosexual into giving up his evil ways.

Kind of like forcing someone to bake a cake, take a picture, or make a floral arrangement OR ELSE!

Just like forcing Facebook and Twitter to give you a social media account OR ELSE. Hell, Congressman Devin Nunes has filed a lawsuit over it and b/c two satire accounts hurt his feels.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Actually that isn't evidence of much, if both were raised in the same environment

He very specifically mentioned that this trend does NOT appear in fraternal twins, who are also raised in the same environment. Try reading a post before responding to it, dude. Thanks.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The article headline and thread title are a lie.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Kind of like forcing someone to bake a cake, take a picture, or make a floral arrangement OR ELSE

None of those people are forced to do anything, just as they arent forced to serve black people. They made the decision to follow the rules when they entered the marketplace. They can decide to leave the marketplace.

 

[martybegan]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

Yeah, but if it's by choice, they can strong arm and torture the homosexual into giving up his evil ways.

Kind of like forcing someone to bake a cake, take a picture, or make a floral arrangement OR ELSE!

Just like forcing Facebook and Twitter to give you a social media account OR ELSE. Hell, Congressman Devin Nunes has filed a lawsuit over it and b/c two satire accounts hurt his feels.

Social media is a new concept that may need to be regulated. If most people get their info from social media, being able to control who gets to post is being able to control civil discussion.

And not just control it, deny it to people deemed unworthy.

I can see the concept of a digital commons being applied to sites like facebook and twitter, unless they take responsibility for everything posted on their sites as their content, and can thus be liable for it.

 

[martybegan]

Kind of like forcing someone to bake a cake, take a picture, or make a floral arrangement OR ELSE

None of those people are forced to do anything, just as they arent forced to serve black people. They made the decision to follow the rules when they entered the marketplace. They can decide to leave the marketplace.

Bake or die.

Nice. So forcing a person to give up what they want to do for a living over a few cases is less invasive then the customers just finding a willing vendor?

The rules are what we are arguing here. A PA was never supposed to be any time $$ changes hands, but a specific service, point of sale, or a place you invite the public into to give a good or service.

 

[martybegan]

Actually that isn't evidence of much, if both were raised in the same environment

He very specifically mentioned that this trend does NOT appear in fraternal twins, who are also raised in the same environment. Try reading a post before responding to it, dude. Thanks.

Or they just didn't really look for it.

Sorry, but studies like this are usually full of errors, which is why I don't see the 40% thing as conclusive when body brings it up.

 

[mdk]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

Yeah, but if it's by choice, they can strong arm and torture the homosexual into giving up his evil ways.

Kind of like forcing someone to bake a cake, take a picture, or make a floral arrangement OR ELSE!

Just like forcing Facebook and Twitter to give you a social media account OR ELSE. Hell, Congressman Devin Nunes has filed a lawsuit over it and b/c two satire accounts hurt his feels.

Social media is a new concept that may need to be regulated. If most people get their info from social media, being able to control who gets to post is being able to control civil discussion.

And not just control it, deny it to people deemed unworthy.

I can see the concept of a digital commons being applied to sites like facebook and twitter, unless they take responsibility for everything posted on their sites as their content, and can thus be liable for it.

You don't a have right to a social media account or a wedding cake, Marty. No one does. It's amazing how property and association rights differ when folks feel it's their ox being gored. If you find Facebook's business practices unacceptable than go to another platform that fits your views. I bet it takes less than five minuets to set up an account on Gab.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Bake or die.

So fucking retarded...you are embarrassing yourself....

Nice. So forcing a person to give up what they want to do for a living over a few cases is less invasive then the customers just finding a willing vendor?

Read slowly....nobody is forcing them to do anything. And all of your argiments are exactly the same arguments arguing for discrimination against black people and women. How embarrassing for you. What's next? Gonna argue that the sun is actuallu a flaming chariot? Gonna argue that diseases are caused by demons?

And sparemethedog and pony show. You foolnobody. Your actual position is that you are a religious goober who finds gays to be icky, therefore people should be allowed to discriminate against them. And that's all. Go peddle your song and dance to someone dumb enough to buy it.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Takes the wind out of born that way....

I wonder if Kate McKinnon can turn frogs gay too

 

[SassyIrishLass]

How so? Convenient to NOT ignore studies on identical twins and that 40% figure?

Have you actually provided proof of what you claim? I haven't seen any therefor your claims are actually baseless and irrelevant.

Gay Men in Twin Study

According to the 1991 report, my 40% was too low.

If gayness were shown by a % in DNA, it wouldn't be lower than 98%, imho. The fact that one study shows 40% and another shows 55% may reflect a glaring difference, but that difference would not be in line with only a 2% chance of gene crossover following conception as the body is shuffling its cards and getting ready for life on the other side of the uterus. There probably is a reason for the difference, it's just not DNA as I understand it.

Faggots will argue that some animals are homosexual. I contend that if some people are homosexual then it stands to reason they are animals too.

I'll never forget Tammy Taint's gay lion thread...effin priceless

 

[bodecea]

Whether homosexuality manifests as a consequence of nature or choice is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

The right to make that choice is protected by the Constitution.

And Religious Freedom isn't?

Religious freedom is fine....but religious freedom doesn't mean that a religion can control others thru our secular laws.

How is having to spend 5 minutes going to another baker "controlling"?

It goes back to the argument of tolerance vs. acceptance.

And we are back to bakers.....imo, if a business cannot follow the business laws they acknowledge by receiving a license, just take the license away. Easy peasy. Same applies if they have "an excuse" for not following safety or health laws.