What are your attitudes about Homosexuals?

[LockeJaw]

It's not "you don't deserve the same rights", Wytchy. It's "you don't deserve the same benefits" when it comes to gay marriage. Your couplings are NOT the same, they're different. If you have kids; that is a different story. That's what marriage is about, children and their safety& well being. You guys seem not to even think about that.

 

[LockeJaw]

Wrong. You're not paying attention to what I am saying. I said that you could very well have been born gay, the science isn't there to prove it 100% yet. I also did not say it was a choice. I've done some more rereading of some of the studies and I don't think you CHOSE to be gay. I said the most likely scenario is enviromental & social causes played the biggest role in it. I'm not even saying it was something like being molested or anything like that, I don't know if you were or weren't. The brain plasticity study proved that brain structure changes AS a product of homosexual activity...that is a start on finding the cause if it is not genetic.


I don't blame you for being apprehensive with me on this, but Im trying not to be a jerk & discuss and maybe learn a little in the process of what gay folks think about this enviromental&social cause theory.

That's it. I even stopped calling you seawench..if you didn't notice.

Nature MAY have made you gay, there is no solid evidence of that yet. It also could have been enviromental & social causes that were outside of your control, something couldve changed the structure of your brain as a baby or young girl, as I stated the brain plasticity study fits right into this. Whatever it was, it happened and now you're gay.

I have another question, Im not sure if you have kids...I know bodey does. Would you want your kids to be straight or gay? If you had a choice...I don't want a "whatever they choose" answer, just which one do you think would ultimately be best for them, make their lives easier, etc...?

You think you were born straight, but I can't have been born gay because "most people" are born straight and yet if someone said only right handed people were born right handed because that is "the norm", they'd be laughed at.

Yes, I have two children and I want them to be happy, period. If it is members of the opposite sex that make them happy, great...(and that's how it's shaping up so far) but if either of them choose a same sex partner and that makes them happy, also great...especially now in America in the 21st century.

 

[LockeJaw]

And I am glad you just love your kids regardless of sexual orientation, that you do not want to influence their decisions, SeaWytch. That makes you a lot different than I originally thought you were. I honestly would be upset if one of my kids were gay, but I honestly don't think I could disown them. I just found out the wife is pregnant with #5 on my birthday yesterday. **** that. I will admit it, I wouldn't because I love my kids too much. I don't have to agree with it, but a father's love is too strong to just "disown" their child...atleast mine is.

 

[GreenBean]

Nature MAY have made you gay, there is no solid evidence of that yet. It also could have been enviromental & social causes that were outside of your control, something couldve changed the structure of your brain as a baby or young girl, as I stated the brain plasticity study fits right into this. Whatever it was, it happened and now you're gay.

I have another question, Im not sure if you have kids...I know bodey does. Would you want your kids to be straight or gay? If you had a choice...I don't want a "whatever they choose" answer, just which one do you think would ultimately be best for them, make their lives easier, etc...?

You think you were born straight, but I can't have been born gay because "most people" are born straight and yet if someone said only right handed people were born right handed because that is "the norm", they'd be laughed at.

The left handed argument has been used before - being left handed is a proven genetic trait, Gay is not, it's an acquired one . Left Handedness involves a complex inheritance pattern. If both parents are left-handed, there is about a 25% chance of that child being left-handed.

Several [theoretical] single gene models have been proposed to explain the patterns of inheritance of handedness, none are completely 100% accepted in the Scientific Community - but the fact of a genetic connection between left handedness and inheritance is not dispute.

Yes, I have two children and I want them to be happy, period. If it is members of the opposite sex that make them happy, great...(and that's how it's shaping up so far) but if either of them choose a same sex partner and that makes them happy, also great...especially now in America in the 21st century.

I Wish your kids all the best , and the luck in finding happiness -heaven knows they're going to need it considering the start they got . If they should be unfortunate enough to acquire your sexual dysphoria by example , I sincerely hope you have the common sense and love those kids enough to seek psychiatric help - conversion / reperative theory before they are too far gone. Go ahead and report this post if you like - I don't care - I'm being sincere and not trying to be malicous or hurtful - if you don't like your kids being discussed -then keep them out of the conversation.... Regards

 

[JOSweetHeart]

No Holly, I didn't make myself attracted to other women. Do you think you could make yourself attracted to members of the same sex?

No and the reason why I couldn't is because I believe that doing such a thing is against the word of the Lord, therefore it is wrong.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

So if it wasn't you could? Seriously? If so, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but you're gay and repressed it or you're bi. You can't choose to be attracted to someone.

You may think that a person can't choose, but I believe that they can because the Lord would not have them be what is against his word.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. And no I am not gay or bi, but if you want to choose to continue thinking that I am, go ahead. You are already wrong about thinking that it isn't a choice. Why not be wrong about something else?

 

[Pop23]

No and the reason why I couldn't is because I believe that doing such a thing is against the word of the Lord, therefore it is wrong.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

So if it wasn't you could? Seriously? If so, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but you're gay and repressed it or you're bi. You can't choose to be attracted to someone.

You may think that a person can't choose, but I believe that they can because the Lord would not have them be what is against his word.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. And no I am not gay or bi, but if you want to choose to continue thinking that I am, go ahead. You are already wrong about thinking that it isn't a choice. Why not be wrong about something else?

Here's the answer Holly.

When you try to rationalize an irrational lifestyle, you must try to draw others into it to justify your delusion.

So, if anyone opposes their lifestyle they try to make you into one of them.

Strange, but true.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ I know. They will grab onto anything in order to keep themselves from drowning.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[JimBowie1958]

OK, so we have 31 people say that homosexuals should have no special protections, and only 1 that says they hate homosexuals.

I know this is not a scientific pole, but it pretty well proves to my mind that opposition to the militant gay agenda has ZERO to do with hatred at all.

 

[Ibentoken]

Define "tolerate".

Do you and the other bigots like you engage in coordinated campaigns of slander and libel against anyone who dares hold an opinion contrary to your own?

Holding an opinion different than mine is fine...speaking it out loud makes it available for public censure.






I don't think you understand the meaning of the word bigot. Yes, I am intolerant of intolerance. I am intolerant of racism, misogyny, anti gay bigotry, religious bigotry and a few others I'm sure.

If someone made an openly racist public statement, you'd ignore it so as to appear "tolerant"?

Homosexuality is a behavior, not a race. The only way anyone even knows your sexual activities is if you tell them or perform them in front of them.

Your attempt to equate behavior with race is patently dishonest, but then, bigots are not ofter worried about integrity...

Discrimination is discrimination. You make discriminatory statements or contribute to discriminatory campaigns, you are subject to public disapproval. I'm glad you can't be openly racist anymore just like I'm glad you can't be openly anti gay anymore.

I'm also subject to public approval. It's called free speech. Anything else?

 

[September]

I am bisexual, ambidextrous, and morally balanced because of choice and willpower... not because of genetics.

 

[BobPlumb]

I am bisexual, ambidextrous, and morally balanced because of choice and willpower... not because of genetics.

You are who you are because of your own free will? You are going to make the LGBT people mad..... But they will forgive you since you are bisexual.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Queers are nasty perverts. We need to return to a healthy society and remove the homosexual agenda from our culture and society. You're confusing impressionable minds with lies. Nothing to do with the Constitution. Queers can live their lives within the constitution. Save the false premises and rhetoric for some naive college kids. This country did very well for 200 years by keeping the nasty filth in the shadows where they belong. Those Americans were good people and so am I. Go back to the shadows and stop calling good people bigots.

Actually you just called LJ and yourself bigots.

Sounds like you believe that slavery was a good thing too. Don't worry, there are others who have admitted to believing that slavery was good so you are not alone in your un-American beliefs in that regard.

The history of this nation has been a step by step process towards enlightenment and ensuring that everyone has their constitutional rights. Originally it was only whites, then blacks were granted their right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Women were next followed by Civil Rights for Blacks. Now it is the turn of Gays. Eventually even Atheists will be treated as equals and allowed to hold the highest elected office in the nation. That probably won't happen in my lifetime but there have been 2 expansions of human rights in my lifetime so perhaps there will be a 3rd before I die.

I'm sure a lot of things sound like slavery to you. If you actually had a point then you wouldn't have to pull the race card so early. This has nothing to do with constitutional rights because queers have had the same rights as anyone else. This is about submission and silencing American citizens who disagree. That's not about rights. That's tyranny

You played the "Queers are nasty perverts" card and then whine when you are exposed as a bigot? By your own measure you obviously don't have a point or even a tenable position to stand on.

The fact that you don't comprehend what constitutional rights are and how they work is why you are using inflammatory terminology like perverts and tyranny. All you have is hate mongering. Needless to say you are probably clueless as to how you are coming across in your posts too.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Queers are nasty perverts. We need to return to a healthy society and remove the homosexual agenda from our culture and society. You're confusing impressionable minds with lies. Nothing to do with the Constitution. Queers can live their lives within the constitution. Save the false premises and rhetoric for some naive college kids. This country did very well for 200 years by keeping the nasty filth in the shadows where they belong. Those Americans were good people and so am I. Go back to the shadows and stop calling good people bigots.

Gay Americans aren't going back in the closet no matter how repressed and frustrated it makes you feel. The oppression of your gay brothers and sisters in the US is over. Uganda and Russia are fertile grounds for your brand of hate I hear.

Oh pshaw. More false rhetoric. You're not going to tell us how to think.

Is that because you can't think and only emote instead?

 

[Derideo_Te]

there is Zero concrete evidence of genetic causes of homosexuality, so your point is null & void.

BZZZT Wrong!

Epigenetics Is A Critical Factor In Homosexuality - Medical News Today

Epigenetics is a Key Player in Sexual Preference Epi-marks act as another layer of information fused to our genes that control their expression. Essentially, genes hold the directions, while epi-marks instruct how they are put into motion and completed.

Historically, epi-marks are eliminated and created anew with each generation, but new research shows that they can occasionally pass over between generations, causing similarities within families and appearing as shared genes.

Sex-specific epi-marks are made during early fetal development and serve as security against the considerable natural variation in testosterone that happens in late fetal development. For example, sex-specific epi-marks prevent female fetuses from becoming masculine when there are unusually high testosterone levels present, and vice versa for male fetuses.

Different kinds of epi-marks safeguard different sex-specific characteristics; some protect the genitals, others protect sexual identity, and this study suggests others keep safe sexual partner preference.

When these epi-marks are passed between generations from fathers to daughters or mothers to sons, they have the potential to result in reverse effects. The outcome is feminization of characteristics in sons or masculinization of some characteristics in daughters, occasionally affecting sexual preference.

This study provides an answer to the evolutionary mystery of homosexuality, suggesting that "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks can, at times, pass from generation to generation and result in homosexuality in opposite-sex children. The mathematical modeling shows that the coding of the genes for these epi-marks can spread in the population easily because they invariably raise the fitness of the parent, but are very rarely erased and do not reduce fitness in their children.

The study's co-author Sergey Gavrilets, NIMBioS' associate director for scientific activities and a professor at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville, concluded, "Transmission of sexually antagonistic epi-marks between generations is the most plausible evolutionary mechanism of the phenomenon of human homosexuality."

Bravo ! Excellent article Derideo - well written and full of hope and wishful thinking. It deals with "Epi-Marks" . Epi-marks are eliminated and recreated with each suceeding generation, and were never considered to have been inherited

The study theorizes and suggests that what they term "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks can, at times, pass from generation to generation - if this is true it is extremely , I repeat extremely rare - although not impossible. The study is inconclusive allthough the theory is sound and plausible it is just that a THEORY - not proof positive .

Although I doapplaud your attempt - I believe youhave failed to debunk Lockejaws statement "there is Zero concrete evidence of genetic causes of homosexuality," allthough the study you cited is promising it is not concrete evidence - just a theory.

The mere existence of a highly plausible genetic theory completely debunks the erroneous allegation by LJ that there is "Zero concrete evidence of genetic causes of homosexuality". Obviously there is now plausible "evidence" regarding the genetic cause and it will take further research to confirm the findings. It is highly likely that the further research will turn up evidence of other genetic factors that are currently not known. That is how science works. They develop a hypothesis and then run a series of tests to determine whether it proves or disproves the theory. The results can often lead to further findings.

So the concrete evidence of epigenetic markers is irrefutable. How they behave in determining gender is irrefutable. The fact that genes don't always behave predictably is irrefutable. The mathematical modeling is irrefutable. The existence of the LBGT children born to straight parents is irrefutable. So it is a highly plausible theory to believe that an epigenetic marker could misbehave and the end result would be someone who is born as a member of the LBGT community. That evidence is way more than "zero" by any measure.

 

[Derideo_Te]

And nature made me gay. Your opinion has no basis in anything other than your own bigotry.

I have already said, twice, that they were not sexual, they were crushes, attractions. Kids play house at age 5. When we played house, I never wanted to be the wife, and always wanted to play the husband.

You're the one spouting nothing but irrational nonsense with no basis in reality let alone science.

And here's a bigoted study done by the CDC that hatefully seems to draw a correlation between gay men and their having been molested as boys... The way "nature" made them, I'm sure...

ATLANTA [2005 Clinical Psychiatry News] -- Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse, and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well, said Ronald Stall, Ph.D., chief of prevention research for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta...

And these crazy bigots over at the Mayo Clinic. What a bunch of "ignorant homophobes "suggesting that ANY sexual orientation is learned!

Mayo Clinic 2007

One of the most obvious examples of an environmental
factor that increases the chances of an individual becoming
an offender is if he or she were sexually abused as a child.
This relationship is known as the “victim-to-abuser cycle”
or “abused-abusers phenomena.”
5,23,24,46...

...
why the “abused abusers phenomena” occurs: identification with the aggressor,
in which the abused child is trying to gain a new
identity by becoming the abuser; an imprinted sexual
arousal pattern established by early abuse; early abuse
leading to hypersexual behavior; or a form of social learning took place
http://www.drrichardhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

And what's this with this review done in Quebec, compiling over 300 peer-reviewed studies with categories like this stating their collective-conclusions?:

INFLUENCE OF LEARNING ON SEXUAL
EXCITEMENT

INFLUENCE OF LEARNING ON
LOCATING A MATE

INFLUENCE OF LEARNING ON
OVERCOMING OBSTACLES TO MATING

INFLUENCE OF LEARNING ON SEXUAL
AROUSAL AND COPULATORY
BEHAVIORS

INFLUENCE OF LEARNING ON SEXUAL
PARTNER PREFERENCES

Conditioning and Sexual Behavior: A Review
James G. Pfaus,1 Tod E. Kippin, and Soraya Centeno
Center for Studies in Behavioral Neurobiology, Department of Psychology, Concordia
University, 1455 deMaisonneuve Bldg. W., Montre´al, Que´bec, H3G 1M8 Canada http://www.pphp.concordia.ca/fac/pfaus/Pfaus-Kippin-Centeno(2001).pdf

All those bigots dare to suggest Seawytch's "naturally made" lesbianism has something to do with the environment she found herself in [near San Francisco, CA]! That's just absurd!

You are confused. Pedophilia is not the same as homosexuality. That you failed to provide source links also says volumes.

 

[Derideo_Te]

And I am glad you just love your kids regardless of sexual orientation, that you do not want to influence their decisions, SeaWytch. That makes you a lot different than I originally thought you were. I honestly would be upset if one of my kids were gay, but I honestly don't think I could disown them. I just found out the wife is pregnant with #5 on my birthday yesterday. **** that. I will admit it, I wouldn't because I love my kids too much. I don't have to agree with it, but a father's love is too strong to just "disown" their child...atleast mine is.

Amazing!

LJ has to deal with the potential that one of his own kids might be gay. All 5 of them brought up in the same household by the same parents with the same values and influences but one turns out to be gay.

What does that do the "brain plasticity" theory?

That LJ loves his kids is great. That he won't disown his own child if they turn out gay is great too. But is he prepared to deny his own child the same right to happiness as the others just because that child turned out to be gay?

And if he wants his gay child to be happy why should that child be denied the right to become a gay adult and marry the consenting adult of their choice?

Extrapolating to the next step is a small one. If LJ loves his own gay child and wants their happiness why does he want to deny happiness to other children who are gay?

 

[JoeB131]

That's all Joe got out of that whole post...smh

you really are an ignorant **********, GUY.

Guy, there isn't much to get out of your post.

YOu're like the vegetarian who can't stop talking about steak.

 

[JoeB131]

It's not "you don't deserve the same rights", Wytchy. It's "you don't deserve the same benefits" when it comes to gay marriage. Your couplings are NOT the same, they're different. If you have kids; that is a different story. That's what marriage is about, children and their safety& well being. You guys seem not to even think about that.

Then by that logic, we should deny marriage licenses to old people on their second marriages who are beyond child bearing years. We should deny marriage licenses to anyone who carries the genetic markers for diseases like Taye-Saches

and these married couples who own pets instead of having kids like the Pope was whinging about the other day? We should totally revoke their marriage licences.

Think of the Children.

 

[JoeB131]

Lockejaw thinks he's healthy..

I can't speak for his physical health, however based on his posts, he appears to one of the few mentally healthy people posting on this thread - and that includes myself.

That reminds me off the joke about the guy at the mental institution who insists he's Napoleon, and the doctor asks him how he knows he's Napoleon, and he says, "God Told Me".

And the guy in the next bed says, "I did not!"

Sorry, dude, if I were to pick out the two biggest homophobic whacks on this board, you and Lockejaw would be competing for those spots with Sil, who is still drunk dialing poor Sean Penn over that Harvey Milk movie.

 

[CorvusRexus]

Oh pshaw. More false rhetoric. You're not going to tell us how to think.

Oh phsaw....False argument since I never told you how to think. I basically told you that your thinking is not going to force gays back in the closet. The number of out gays is only going to grow. You can continue to feel however you want to feel about it...what you try to legislate is the only thing that I give a shit about.

Well, what we're going to do is rally around and support every Christian business you target. We had so much fun with the Robertson family and Chik Filet making tons of money when you targeted them, and we're going to support the Christian bakers, florists, etc. Looking forward to it. The Robertson family and Chik Filet just got more business when you attacked them. Go for it.

And here is an excellent example of why this country is ruined.

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean you run their cause into the ground, be a bigot, or make everything about "us vs. them".

Sorry both sides, but those of you who refuse to listen to the other side are wrong.