Is homosexuality a biological construct?

[Iceweasel]

What I'm not quite sure I understand is why this is such a hot topic in the grand scheme of things. And I guess my biggest question is why some people get so angry - and even violent - about it.

Like who? Like when you are forced to bake a gay wedding cake against your will? To not understand the political ramifications behind the gay agenda means you are detuned to the political realm around you.

What does any of that have to do with whether or not it's naturally occurring?

Everything. How is this a revelation? If people are born with a predetermined sexual outcome, genetic like race, it would fall into equal protections laws, which is exactly what homosexual militants are cramming down our throats. Either get some basic information or quit posting, it's like a toddler interrupting an adult conversation.

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

Her brain is gone, reading her posts is like watching someone bounce around in a padded cell in a straight jacket. She thinks she is making sense, just not understood.

 

[Pop23]

It is a naturally occurring anamoly. Normally benign until the anamoly is accepted as normal.

It's interesting, I did the math, if you flip the demographics, and instead of 90% + being hetro, and made that Population (and all future generations) 90% homosexual, the population of human beings in the United States would be zero within 11 generations.

That's also giving those populations every benefit. Each hetro female having 4 children and no hetro female dies before they too had 4 children.

It was actually a chilling excersize.

You are really in love with that idiocy aren't you?

It's all in the math.

As far as our species in concerned, heterosexually is ultimately important and homosexuality is a dead end street.

Seven billion people and counting. We could use some dead end streets around here.

Careful what you ask for.

And if you're volunteering to jump off.....

Go for it

 

[Seawytch]

People have been getting violent at the "other" since we crawled out of the primordial muck.

But there is something else going on when a person gets angry and violent with someone for no other reason than because they are gay.

One obvious possible answer would be that their own sexuality is somehow being threatened, and that makes them both defensive and physically aggressive. That's a lot of shit going on inside their head, and I just wonder what that mental schematic looks like.
.

Seems reasonable to believe that the self loathing and fear of being found out drives some of the loudest homophobic voices.

And then, to become violent. That's a big step, so those forces have to be pretty strong.
.

I agree. It could be that those who would take it to the level of violence already have violent tendencies separate from their other issues. Homosexuals happen to be their focus as that's what drives their anger.

And additionally, to Seawytch's point, it could also just be that they're just cowards who are picking on people they perceive to be weaker.

Or some combination therein, I reckon.
...

“Every bully always picks on the weakest kid in the room, and he thought that was going to be the drag queen. A lot of people make that mistake.” ~ Ambrosia Starling (talking about the Alabama governor)

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What I'm not quite sure I understand is why this is such a hot topic in the grand scheme of things. And I guess my biggest question is why some people get so angry - and even violent - about it.

Like who? Like when you are forced to bake a gay wedding cake against your will? To not understand the political ramifications behind the gay agenda means you are detuned to the political realm around you.

What does any of that have to do with whether or not it's naturally occurring?

Everything. How is this a revelation? If people are born with a predetermined sexual outcome, genetic like race, it would fall into equal protections laws, which is exactly what homosexual militants are cramming down our throats. Either get some basic information or quit posting, it's like a toddler interrupting an adult conversation.

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

The other is A Civil Right.

Yet protected by the 14th amd.

 

[DGS49]

(a) Despite many years of trying, the Gay Mafia has yet to find a "gay gene." It doesn't exist. There are well-documented cases of identical twins where one is "gay" and the other is not. Same genes, different orientation.

(b) The best hard data on the subject indicates that less than 2% of the American adult population identifies itself as homosexual or lesbian. In the "arts," it is obviously much higher.

(c) Gay and lesbian are completely different phenomena. Gay is an innate impulsion in which a male experiences overt "sexual" attraction to other males. Lesbian is much more a matter of choice, often resulting from unpleasant experiences or a lack of opportunity for successful heterosexual relationships (e.g., Rosie O'Donnell, Linda Hunt).

(d) Many formerly-gay men have undergone successful conversion therapy and many have, by force of will, "converted." Regardless, the total percentage of the male population which experiences this sexual attraction is miniscule. The Gay Mafia disputes "conversion" violently, because it implies (to them) that ANY gay man can "convert" if they choose to do so. Disputing reality is not healthy for anyone. In popular fiction - due to political pressure - the whole idea of "conversion" is treated as delusional and impossible.

(e) It was only as a result of political pressure that the psychiatric community re-classified homosexuality from a "disorder" that could be treated, to a "normal" aberration like left-handedness.

(f) Buggering another man (or being buggered) or sucking his cock (or getting a BJ) is not "having sex." If you don't believe me, consider President Clinton's TRUTHFUL statement that he "did not have sex with" Ms. Lewinsky. Again, it is only a result of political pressure that the expression, "having sex" has been re-defined to include any activity involving gratification-seeking activities employing the sexual organs.

(h) Homosexuality cannot be legally defined. It has no identifiable physical characteristics and ultimately comes down to whether the individual wants to be so classified. Men in prison sometimes have years-long relationships characterized by regular acts of "homosexual sodomy," but if you referred to such people as "homosexual" they would dispute it violently.

(i) The current Leftie Idiocy is that gender, like homosexuality, is a matter of personal identification (but NOT "choice"). "Not all women have vaginas," we are told. Bullshit, on steroids. This particular Leftie Idiocy threatens the entire world of interscholastic sports. Har-de-har, Har!

 

[NYcarbineer]

You are really in love with that idiocy aren't you?

It's all in the math.

As far as our species in concerned, heterosexually is ultimately important and homosexuality is a dead end street.

Then bring back polygamy if you're so concerned that the human race is dying off.

btw, is the human race dying off?

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

How many more children could a could a woman have, regardless the number of men she's with?

Shows how completely useless to the species homosexuality is.

If it were as dominant sexuality, in percentage, as heterosexuality is now, the species fails in 11 generations.

It's not the dominant sexuality. You're creating a strawman. A big gay strawman.

No, math equations are completely objective. And the math proves how unimportant homosexuality is when compared to heterosexuality is.

So if it's unimportant why are you shitting yourself over it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

What I'm not quite sure I understand is why this is such a hot topic in the grand scheme of things. And I guess my biggest question is why some people get so angry - and even violent - about it.

Like who? Like when you are forced to bake a gay wedding cake against your will? To not understand the political ramifications behind the gay agenda means you are detuned to the political realm around you.

What does any of that have to do with whether or not it's naturally occurring?

Everything. How is this a revelation? If people are born with a predetermined sexual outcome, genetic like race, it would fall into equal protections laws, which is exactly what homosexual militants are cramming down our throats. Either get some basic information or quit posting, it's like a toddler interrupting an adult conversation.

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

There is no difference whatsover in a right protected by the 1st Amendment and a right protected by the 14th Amendment.

If you're going to play the 'what's in the original Constitution or not in the original Constitution' game,

religious rights are not in the original Constitution.

They are in an amendment.

 

[NYcarbineer]

All human behaviour is biological.

 

[NYcarbineer]

(

(h) Homosexuality cannot be legally defined. !

It apparently can be defined by employers who refuse employment to someone because the employer won't hire homosexuals.

 

[saveliberty]

All human behaviour is biological.

So why is this not a science thread? Or Health and Lifestyle?

 

[NYcarbineer]

All human behaviour is biological.

So why is this not a science thread? Or Health and Lifestyle?

Do you want to dispute my assertion or do you want to jabber like a monkey?

 

[Pop23]

Like who? Like when you are forced to bake a gay wedding cake against your will? To not understand the political ramifications behind the gay agenda means you are detuned to the political realm around you.

What does any of that have to do with whether or not it's naturally occurring?

Everything. How is this a revelation? If people are born with a predetermined sexual outcome, genetic like race, it would fall into equal protections laws, which is exactly what homosexual militants are cramming down our throats. Either get some basic information or quit posting, it's like a toddler interrupting an adult conversation.

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

The other is A Civil Right.

Yet protected by the 14th amd.

The basis for the 1964 civil rights legislation.

The argument is if this applies.

Is this an arbitrary rule that segregates simalar situated individuals?

Clearly it does not.

 

[Pop23]

It's all in the math.

As far as our species in concerned, heterosexually is ultimately important and homosexuality is a dead end street.

Then bring back polygamy if you're so concerned that the human race is dying off.

btw, is the human race dying off?

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

How many more children could a could a woman have, regardless the number of men she's with?

Shows how completely useless to the species homosexuality is.

If it were as dominant sexuality, in percentage, as heterosexuality is now, the species fails in 11 generations.

It's not the dominant sexuality. You're creating a strawman. A big gay strawman.

No, math equations are completely objective. And the math proves how unimportant homosexuality is when compared to heterosexuality is.

So if it's unimportant why are you shitting yourself over it?

Due to those trying to make it something it's not

Important.

 

[Pop23]

Like who? Like when you are forced to bake a gay wedding cake against your will? To not understand the political ramifications behind the gay agenda means you are detuned to the political realm around you.

What does any of that have to do with whether or not it's naturally occurring?

Everything. How is this a revelation? If people are born with a predetermined sexual outcome, genetic like race, it would fall into equal protections laws, which is exactly what homosexual militants are cramming down our throats. Either get some basic information or quit posting, it's like a toddler interrupting an adult conversation.

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

There is no difference whatsover in a right protected by the 1st Amendment and a right protected by the 14th Amendment.

If you're going to play the 'what's in the original Constitution or not in the original Constitution' game,

religious rights are not in the original Constitution.

They are in an amendment.

Absolutely wrong, but you blabber on, it's what you do.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What does any of that have to do with whether or not it's naturally occurring?

Everything. How is this a revelation? If people are born with a predetermined sexual outcome, genetic like race, it would fall into equal protections laws, which is exactly what homosexual militants are cramming down our throats. Either get some basic information or quit posting, it's like a toddler interrupting an adult conversation.

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

The other is A Civil Right.

Yet protected by the 14th amd.

The basis for the 1964 civil rights legislation.

The argument is if this applies.

Is this an arbitrary rule that segregates simalar situated individuals?

Clearly it does not.

Wow you are in la-la land aren't you?

 

[Pop23]

Everything. How is this a revelation? If people are born with a predetermined sexual outcome, genetic like race, it would fall into equal protections laws, which is exactly what homosexual militants are cramming down our throats. Either get some basic information or quit posting, it's like a toddler interrupting an adult conversation.

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

The other is A Civil Right.

Yet protected by the 14th amd.

The basis for the 1964 civil rights legislation.

The argument is if this applies.

Is this an arbitrary rule that segregates simalar situated individuals?

Clearly it does not.

Wow you are in la-la land aren't you?

No, obviously not.

It's the argument that overturned Same Sex Marriage bans.

Now, demonstrate how a man with a dick is somehow more similar to a woman then another man with a dick.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

The other is A Civil Right.

Yet protected by the 14th amd.

The basis for the 1964 civil rights legislation.

The argument is if this applies.

Is this an arbitrary rule that segregates simalar situated individuals?

Clearly it does not.

Wow you are in la-la land aren't you?

No, obviously not.

It's the argument that overturned Same Sex Marriage bans.

Now, demonstrate how a man with a dick is somehow more similar to a woman then another man with a dick.

What are you arguing? Read the thread.

 

[g5000]

Historically I believe that homosexuality was typically considered a social construct, in which any person had the potential to develop gay attractions if in the right situation (ex. prison inmates having gay relations due to isolation from women).

It seems like only in recent times has homosexuality been touted as a biological construct and an "identity" put on the same level as sex and race.

I'm wondering what exactly sparked all of this hubub; as there's definitely no conclusive evidence that homosexuality is "genetic" or that people are "born that way" despite activist claims.

Really. You thought the only gays in the old days were guys in prison.

You're joking, right?

This bullshit is just a way of saying they should all be shoved back in the closet.

"Out of sight, out of mind!"

 

[g5000]

I remember those good old days. Sure. The gays knew their place was in the closet. The negros knew their place was out in the cotton fields, not in the voting booth.

Let's Make America Great Again!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Actually, genetics have nothing to do with equal protections laws. Religion is not a choice and yet is protected against discrimination in all 50 states. Take the log out of your eye there, weasel.

She knows better then this. Making a argument that simply does not exist.

Religion is a constitutionally protected right. The other is A Civil Right.

They are completely different.

The other is A Civil Right.

Yet protected by the 14th amd.

The basis for the 1964 civil rights legislation.

The argument is if this applies.

Is this an arbitrary rule that segregates simalar situated individuals?

Clearly it does not.

Wow you are in la-la land aren't you?

No, obviously not.

It's the argument that overturned Same Sex Marriage bans.

Now, demonstrate how a man with a dick is somehow more similar to a woman then another man with a dick.

If a veteran lost his penis in combat, which bathroom would you require him to use?