Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Shocker: Am I Anti-Gay? ["Gays" malign "Gay"-friendly Pychology Today editor]
Psychology Today ^ | Jan/Feb 2003 | Robert Epstein

Posted on 01/29/2003 11:29:48 AM PST by Notwithstanding

Summary: You be the judge. A letter form the editor in chief.

... I bring these matters to your attention because of a threatening phone call I received a few weeks ago from a fellow psychologist. On page 78 of our last issue, PT ran a small ad for a book called A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality by Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D., and his wife Linda. Nicolosi is a psychologist who specializes in trying to help unhappy gays become straight. Apparently feeling that this rather modest contribution to the literature on homosexuality wasn't getting enough attention, the psychologist, who identified herself as a lesbian activist, called me at home on a Saturday to tell me that PT should not have run such a heinous ad, that she was speaking for "thousands" of gays who were going to boycott PT, "and worse," that Dr. Nicolosi was a "bigot," that no gay person had ever successfully become straight, that homosexuality was entirely determined by genes, and that sexual conversion therapy had been condemned by the American Psychological Association. I told her that the editorial department at PT has no connection whatsoever with the advertising department, but she was unimpressed. She subsequently posted messages on the Internet urging people to harrass me at home (no one else ever did) and to send me complaint letters.

In all, I received about 120 letters, many of which exemplified a bad game of Telephone: Some people complained about an anti-gay "article" PT had published; others referred to an anti-gay book I had published and people who weren't subscribers said they were dropping their subscriptions. Several writers suggested I was a "Nazi" and a "bigot," and one compared me with the Taliban. A surprising number of letters asserted that gays have a right to be rude or abusive because they themselves have been abused. Most echoed the same points that my caller had made....

(Excerpt) Read more at psychologytoday.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: catholiclist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-324 next last
Great find by Polycarp.
1 posted on 01/29/2003 11:29:48 AM PST by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
something to carp about
2 posted on 01/29/2003 11:33:16 AM PST by Notwithstanding (Are you pro-abortion because you were involved with one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding; *Catholic_list; .45MAN; AKA Elena; al_c; american colleen; Angelus Errare; ...
And a hearty bump to you!
3 posted on 01/29/2003 11:34:54 AM PST by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Confucious say: Lie down with dogs............get fleas.

It doesn't take a Ph.D. in psychology to know this.

4 posted on 01/29/2003 11:35:09 AM PST by DoctorMichael (Liberals SuK; Liberalism SuX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AKA Elena; american colleen; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; Aristophanes; ArrogantBustard; Askel5; ...
ping
5 posted on 01/29/2003 11:35:42 AM PST by Notwithstanding (Are you pro-abortion because you were involved with one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Welcome to the world where critical thought is rejected.

It's a queer world, I know, but you'll get used to it, your children have.


[I guess I should send this to the magazine too, eh?]
6 posted on 01/29/2003 11:37:17 AM PST by Maelstrom (Government Limited to Enumerated Powers is your freedom to do what isn't in the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Hate-filled, shrieking, gay-activist dittos!
7 posted on 01/29/2003 11:37:26 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
if homosexuality is caused by genes, THEN WHICH GENES CAUSE IT? WHERE ARE THEY?
8 posted on 01/29/2003 11:40:06 AM PST by camle (Camle pox?!?!? I hope there's a vaccine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
There's a great deal of evidence, direct and indirect, that homosexuality stems from childhood experiences and difficulties (lack of love from father, poor relationships with kids of same sex, homosexual molestation). Any loving parent would not want their kid to turn out homosexual and should welcome this book, which helps to prevent many of those situations which are related to the development of homosexuality.
9 posted on 01/29/2003 11:42:24 AM PST by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
If its genetic, then the natural question is:

"Which genes cause a boy to be the victim of a lack of love from father, poor relationships with kids of same sex, and homosexual molestation?"
10 posted on 01/29/2003 11:45:16 AM PST by Notwithstanding (Are you pro-abortion because you were involved with one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
Why Judaism Rejected Homosexuality

"...We can say “chosen” because the vast majority of gay men have had intercourse with women. As a four-year study of 128 gay men by a UCLA professor of psychology revealed, “More than 92 percent of the gay men had dated a woman at some time, two-thirds had sexual intercourse with a woman.” As of now, the one theory we can rule out is that homosexuals are biologically programmed to be homosexual. Despite an understandably great desire on the part of many to prove it (and my own inclination to believe it), there is simply no evidence that homosexuality is biologically determined.

11 posted on 01/29/2003 11:48:01 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Tell that to the male sheep

What about lesbianism then? What about other animals and homosexual exclusiveness? What percentage of male sheep rape? What percentage of male sheep go after young sheep? How many male sheep do not have exclusive sexual partners? What percentage of male sheep behave any other undesirable way? Many bad behaviors have been with us from the beginning. Greed is natural. Lust is natural. That's no argument.

12 posted on 01/29/2003 11:48:19 AM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
"...that homosexuality was entirely determined by genes...'

Doesn't that make it a disease?

13 posted on 01/29/2003 11:49:35 AM PST by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
Always amazed me how Hollywood homosexuals like Rock Huson -Montgomery Cliff -- etc could play those roles where they were making love to women
Seemed so weird
14 posted on 01/29/2003 11:53:32 AM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
"... subsequently posted messages on the Internet urging people to harrass me at home (no one else ever did) ...."

And how often have we seen FR posters do this? It's wrong no matter who does it, or for what reason.

All in all this is one of the best treatments of this subject I've ever read.
15 posted on 01/29/2003 12:00:31 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: camle
And how is the gene passed along since gays can't reproduce? It takes a heterosexual act to produce ALL people. So if a gay reproduces is he bisexual?
16 posted on 01/29/2003 12:00:50 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
"It's a queer world, I know, but you'll get used to it, your children have."

Is that why the current shorthand among kids for describing something they have a highly disfavorable opinion of is to say, "That's gay!"?
17 posted on 01/29/2003 12:02:56 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
Many gays have their own children. I know several and they're all screwed up worse than Bill Clinton. But most, if not all are decidedly NOT gay.

strange how that works, Gay children come overwhelmingly fron non-gay parents, and gays who reproduce, have overwhelmingly non-gay children.

genetic huh?
18 posted on 01/29/2003 12:03:46 PM PST by camle (Camle pox?!?!? I hope there's a vaccine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Oh yeah...and how many female sheep have oral sex exclusively...or use fake penises to penetrate female sheep? Does lesbianism exist AT ALL in the sheep world?

This natural argument just does not hold up.

19 posted on 01/29/2003 12:04:44 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
"And how is the gene passed along since gays can't reproduce?"

Not all genetically-determined characteristics are the product of one gene with a binary solution set. There are many such that are the product of multiple genes, and where the genes themselves can be in more than two states. To oversimplify, one could posit a genetic set up where there are two genes contributing; each parent might be 40% influenced towards being gay, but function as heterosexuals. Their child might then get the characteristics of both and be 80% influenced towards being gay.

There is no proof that this kind of thing exists with regards to sexual orientation. But there are mechanisms that would allow such a thing to be dormant in one or both parents, only to come up as dominant in their offspring.
20 posted on 01/29/2003 12:08:02 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Excellent article. The entire sheds the excerpt in a better light.
21 posted on 01/29/2003 12:21:10 PM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
Last week before he went on vacation, Rush posited an interesting conundrum for the Left:

Let's assume that the Gay Activists are correct, that homosexuality is caused by a "gay gene." Also, suppose that genetic technology advances to the point whereby a physician is able - like they are today with certain prenatal abnormalities - to tell prospective parents that their unborn child is destined to be: homosexual.

What would the pro-choice crowd do with this? Hmmmm?

22 posted on 01/29/2003 12:32:40 PM PST by COBOL2Java
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Woopsie - logic check:

1. this Epstein guy was falsely accused by the "gay" lobby and "harassed" for something he did not do

2. whereas some people are "harassed" wfor reprehensible behavior that is CORRECTLY described

one may critique either or both, but the two situations are not the same
23 posted on 01/29/2003 12:33:36 PM PST by Notwithstanding (Are you pro-abortion because you were involved with one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Yes....but over time the math doesn't work. It would eventually be erradicated because anyone who actually was gay could not reproduce -- unless they are at least able to function heterosexually too.

Type 0 blood is recessive. You must have two 0 genes to have 0 blood. Your parents can have A type blood -- dominate -- and you can have 0 only if they have an A/0 gene combination.

Now if everyone with type 0 blood could not reproduce then the percentage of people with type 0 blood would be drastically reduced until it was pretty much eliminated because the only reproducers in society could -- at best -- provide a 25 percent chance of having a baby with type 0 blood.

My point is...even with your theory gayness would eventually be non-existent if it were strictly genetic. Perhaps another analogy would have been hair color with a light and dark potential -- but I doubt sexuality is a hetero/homo potential type case. Still, without being able to reproduce, time would not be their friend.

Now if you argue that it is a genetic abnormality or anomaly your theory might work. Rare diseases and disorders fit into that category. But we do not call them normal and desirable. I doubt anyone would be comfortable putting gayness in that category.

It has been awhile since I have studied genetics but that's the way I remember it.

Besides, then what about rape or other undesirable sexual behaviors. Are they genetic? At what point is a person just responsible for making their own behavioral choices?

24 posted on 01/29/2003 12:33:54 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: camle
Studies of indentical twins, separated at birth, completely shreds the myth that all homosexuality is driven by genetics. In fact, most separated identical twins (twins sharing the same genetic material) are heterosexual. When there is a homosexual twin, only in a small minority of the cases are BOTH separated twins homosexual. If homosexuality was purely gene driven, there would be a greater percentage of twins where both twins report homosexual behavior.

It is clear that much human behavoir is genetically driven. However, it is clear from these studies that deviant sexual behavior is, by-and-large, learned.

25 posted on 01/29/2003 1:04:38 PM PST by capitan_refugio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Funny how they believe that people can go their whole life including many years of marriage, parenthood, etc. before leaving that all behind to become a homosexual divorcee but the converse (living a sexually abberant lifestyle seeking kicks, humiliation, and sexual gratification/release could prove to be hollow and not what the person really wants; he/she is just trying to exorcise inner demons from sexual abuse or "not fitting in") can't be true...
26 posted on 01/29/2003 1:44:52 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: capitan_refugio
minority. Surveys indicate that as much as 70 percent of the American public is "homophobic." That misnomer suggests that people fear homosexuals; a more appropriate term would be homomisic, from the Greek term misos ("hatred"), since many Americans actually hate gays.

Actually recent studies show that most people who are misnamed homophobic are not afraid of homosexual and do not hate homosexuals but are disgusted by homosexuals.

Many consider homosexuality to be immoral because of strong language in the Bible prohibiting males from "lying with" males (especially Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 and Romans 1:26-27). But many Biblical prohibitions (e.g., against intercourse during menstruation or against masturbation) are ignored by modern culture,

There is a large portion of the religious culture that still follows Leviticus and Romans so setting it aside is not as clear as you would like it to be. If you do not spend a great deal of time in the religious subculture you would not know these things.

so it's clear that we can set aside the moral objections against homosexuality when we choose to do so. In the Netherlands, a Christian country,

The Netherlands is not more a Christian country than Egypt is a Jewish country. Practicing Jews may have lived there once but no more...

less than 20 percent of the public is anti-gay. Religious objections to homosexuality can, it seems, be overcome. Others consider homosexuality to be unnatural, and they're simply wrong. Homosexual behavior has existed throughout human history; it exists throughout the animal kingdom; and it exists in every culture on earth-even in those that punish such behavior by death.

So has murder, lying and stealing.

The evidence is overwhelming that homosexual behavior is at least partially genetic in origin. More than 6 percent of male sheep, for example, are exclusively homosexual

Sheep in herds? Or wild and normal sheep on mountains. Sheep have been genetically modified throughout the years to make them docile and unable to care for themselves so they are not management problems. Not an example of a natural occurring homosexuality.

and a 1996 study showed that homosexual behavior in fruit flies can be deliberately engineered by genetic manipulation.

Deliberately engineered homosexuality is not exactly proof that it is a natural and normally occurring event. If you are saying that the preference itself is in the genes, one must evaluate whether it is an aberration on the level with dogs who dig and bite at themselves...

More to the point, concordance studies with humans suggest that male homosexuality is roughly 50 percent genetic in origin (compared with 5 percent for weight and 84 percent for height).

No actually there was no corrolation in studies by non-homosexuals.

I bring these matters to your attention because of a threatening phone call I received a few weeks ago from a fellow psychologist. On page 78 of our last issue, PT ran a small ad for a book called A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality by Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D., and his wife Linda. Nicolosi is a psychologist who specializes in trying to help unhappy gays become straight. Apparently feeling that this rather modest contribution to the literature on homosexuality wasn't getting enough attention, the psychologist, who identified herself as a lesbian activist, called me at home on a Saturday to tell me that PT should not have run such a heinous ad, that she was speaking for "thousands" of gays who were going to boycott PT, "and worse," that Dr. Nicolosi was a "bigot," that no gay person had ever successfully become straight, that homosexuality was entirely determined by genes, and that sexual conversion therapy had been condemned by the American Psychological Association. I told her that the editorial department at PT has no connection whatsoever with the advertising department, but she was unimpressed. She subsequently posted messages on the Internet urging people to harrass me at home (no one else ever did) and to send me complaint letters.

This has been the experience of many conservatives who want to have a dialog with the homosexual community.

In all, I received about 120 letters, many of which exemplified a bad game of Telephone: Some people complained about an anti-gay "article" PT had published; others referred to an anti-gay book I had published and people who weren't subscribers said they were dropping their subscriptions. Several writers suggested I was a "Nazi" and a "bigot," and one compared me with the Taliban. A surprising number of letters asserted that gays have a right to be rude or abusive because they themselves have been abused. Most echoed the same points that my caller had made.

But my caller was way off base on key points. The APA has never condemned sexual conversion therapy but has merely issued cautionary statements, one of which reminds psychologists of their obligation to "respect the rights of others to hold values, attitudes and opinions that differ from [their] own"-an obligation from which my caller clearly feels exempt. Although homosexuality was removed from the DSM-the diagnostic manual used by therapists-as a mental disorder in 1973, all editions of the DSM have always listed a disorder characterized by "distress" over one's sexual orientation (DSM section 302.9). Both gays and straights have a right to seek treatment when they're unhappy with their sexual orientation, and some choose to try to change that orientation. It would be absurd to assert that only heterosexuals should have that right.

Can gays change? Some people who wrote to me insisted that "orientation" is immutable, but behavior is certainly not, and it's common for people to ask therapists to help them suppress a wide variety of tendencies with possible genetic bases: compulsive shopping and gambling, drinking, drug use, aggressiveness, urges to have too much sex or sex with children and so on. A 2002 research review by Warren Throckmorton, Ph.D., published in an APA journal, suggests that sexual conversion therapy is at least sometimes successful. From this and other sources I've checked, I'd guess that such therapy is probably successful about a third of the time and that in perhaps another third of the cases, clients are unhappy or even angry about their failure to change. These figures might sound discouraging, but there are certainly many examples of clinical problems that resist change (e.g., agoraphobia and autism) or that produce angry outcomes after therapy (e.g., couples counseling or treatment for sexual abuse). Of greater importance is a new study by Robert Spitzer, M.D., of Columbia University, the man who headed the committee responsible for removing "homosexuality" from the DSM in 1973. After surveying 200 people who had remained "ex-gay" for at least five years-and even though he has been under tremendous pressure by gay activists to repudiate his findings-Spitzer has concluded that sexual conversion therapy can produce significant, positive and lasting changes.

Have you ever phoned Dr. Spitzer and asked him about his experience with the homosexual community after he published his last findings?

Regarding Dr. Nicolosi and A Parent's Guide... : The book itself is surprisingly tame. It notes, for example, that children who might be headed toward homosexuality "should not be forced into a predetermined mold," that sexual orientation can only be modified "to some extent," that there is no "guarantee" that a child will grow up to be heterosexual and that homosexuality has "biological influences." On the down side, the authors attribute virtually all male homosexuality to poor father-son relationships, failing to present any hard data to support their assertion and ignoring the possibility that fathers avoid effeminate sons-in other words, that homosexual tendencies cause bad father-son relations and not vice versa. The authors also make the naive assertion that because we all come equipped with sex organs, we were "designed" for heterosexuality. Tell that to the male sheep. Dr. Nicolosi has also made, in my view, intemperate and irresponsible public comments about homosexuality, and he does not deny having made them. Ironically, in addition to receiving threats and insults from gay activists, I have also received brutal letters from readers who objected to my sympathetic answer to a question about homosexuality in my column, "Ask Dr. E," on page 86 of the same issue that carried the ad for the Nicolosi book. A lot of people, it seems, hate me no matter what I say, or don't say, on this issue. (To be fair and factual, I also received a few crossover letters: Some gays expressed strong support for PT's right to carry the ad, condemning censorship in any form.)

Psychology Today reviewed the sexual conversion issue in 1999, but it's clearly time to do so again. Two new books are out on the subject, two others will be out any day now, and the Spitzer data will soon be in print. So stay tuned; we'll soon offer an objective, comprehensive look at the ex-gay issue and will also give the factions space to vent.

By the way, in spite of the fact that I've now been introduced to a dark, intolerant, abusive side of the gay community, I will continue to be a strong advocate for gay and lesbian causes, to champion the individual's right to self-determination, and to condemn any attempts by anyone to suppress the truth. So, am I anti-gay?

No, and just like a true liberal you don't learn from experience but continue to spout the same Political Correctness.

Best,

27 posted on 01/29/2003 1:50:22 PM PST by mlmr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
I've seen the original sheep report on FR and did catch it in the referenced article. My response is that animals also eat their own poop, eat their young, "rape" others as an expresion of dominance (even over males; prison guards also permit such activity in prisons), hump other species (including human legs), hump inanimated furniture/stuffed dolls.

We can rise above animal impulses. Certainly some of us can. Age of consent varies by state and nation. Would the author also hold up studies that show that adults and minors should engage in sex (or that such activity should at least have a universally agreed age)?

28 posted on 01/29/2003 1:55:45 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
At what point is a person just responsible for making their own behavioral choices?

The eternal socialist-adolescents of the Baby Boom generation don't ever want to be held personally responsible for their actions. Got to be "someone else's" fault or something they can't control.

29 posted on 01/29/2003 1:59:57 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
A lot-o-hate goin on in the gay community...
30 posted on 01/29/2003 2:00:17 PM PST by 69ConvertibleFirebird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF
That's all very interesting, but -- and, not that it's genetic but, if it were -- it could be recessive, too.

;-)

31 posted on 01/29/2003 2:02:38 PM PST by newgeezer (A conservative who conserves -- a true capitalist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 69ConvertibleFirebird
A lot-o-hate goin on in the gay community...

Why, if I didn't know better, I might think it was INTOLERANCE on their part!

32 posted on 01/29/2003 2:03:54 PM PST by newgeezer (Romans 1:26-32)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

Comment #34 Removed by Moderator

To: Notwithstanding
On page 78 of our last issue, PT ran a small ad for a book called A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality by Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D., and his wife Linda. Nicolosi is a psychologist who specializes in trying to help unhappy gays

A redundancy.

become straight. Apparently feeling that this rather modest contribution to the literature on homosexuality wasn't getting enough attention, the psychologist, who identified herself as a lesbian activist, called me at home on a Saturday to tell me that PT should not have run such a heinous ad, that she was speaking for "thousands" of gays who were going to boycott PT, "and worse," that Dr. Nicolosi was a "bigot,"

a lie

that no gay person had ever successfully become straight,

Another lie

that homosexuality was entirely determined by genes,

a baldfaced lie

and that sexual conversion therapy had been condemned by the American Psychological Association.

A political organization that sang the praises of pedophilia a couple years back.

If I were this "lesbian activist," I would not speak so loudly about tolerance.

35 posted on 01/29/2003 3:06:03 PM PST by Houmatt (The OTHER Axis of Evil: The ACLU, Planned Parenthood, the NEA, and the Rats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #36 Removed by Moderator

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: RAT Patrol
There is evidence (not overwhelming) that homosexuality may have genetic influences. There is even a good argument for genetic homosexuality. It goes like this. Ahem (visualize weedy professor here, chalk dust on nerdy pants with one of those sweaters with the elbow patches.)

The human condition for most of human existance has been tribal. Wolves have packs, sheep have flocks, cattle herd, and people lived in tribes.

Now visualize an advantage to family groups where, say, a couple of guys never "mate" (with women.) They are going to be somebodies brothers and uncles. They bring in game from hunting, or make arrowheads, whatever. The thing is, their "income" is given to the family units of their brothers, sisters, nephews and nieces. Not their own.

They don't have to reproduce themselves. For recessive genes, the genes will be passed on by their brothers and sisters. So - there is a selective advantage to having a small (say 2% or 3%) of the males to be oriented to not mate with females. The advantage goes directly to their immediate extended family and then to the tribe.

They produce more resources than they consume! This can be significant when you consider how close to the edge of survival exist most tribes. A tough winter, a mammoth stepping on a couple hunters, etc. Having a couple contributors who don't have continuously pregnant "wives" and a pack of kids who would otherwise get first dibs on their provinder...that can make the difference on a tribe surviving or not.

This hypothesis explains why there may be a genetic advantage to having a small percentage of males oriented towards homosexuality. (There may be an equal number of females so oriented, but in a tribal society, unless they become shaman/witches/herb girls and so have enough value to be left alone, they get "mated" whether they will or not.) Note this works only for tribes or packs, but not herds (where a dominant male will mate with most females.)

Got it? So there is a hypothesis that explains why there could be a genetic predisposition for a small amount of homosexuality among humans. (Doesn't prove it one way or another, of course.)

38 posted on 01/29/2003 3:20:19 PM PST by dark_lord (a voice crying in the wilderness...rome is burning, burning, burning...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator

Comment #41 Removed by Moderator

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: dark_lord
Pretty far fetched hypothesis, imo.

Also...if it is genetic then why don't gays have physical characteristics that accomodate this? For example: Gay men should have vagina like qualities to their anus to accommodate their different mode of sexual intercourse. Women should have -- I don't know -- something to accommodate theirs. As it is now all they do for "intercourse" is mutually masturbate. According to the Democrats, that isn't sex.

In short: If gays evolved that way then why didn't -- in the course of natural selection and evolution -- they also get different body parts that support their behavior?

43 posted on 01/29/2003 3:31:48 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: camle
"if homosexuality is caused by genes...."

Diarrhea is also hereditary....scientists are finding it in the g(j)eans of kids all accross America...
44 posted on 01/29/2003 3:33:28 PM PST by TRY ONE (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #45 Removed by Moderator

Comment #46 Removed by Moderator

To: RAT Patrol
And how is the gene passed along since gays can't reproduce?

(mock scolding) Silly boy. That's too easy!

The "genes" are passed along by way of introducing homosexuality and how "normal" it is to children too young to be able to know anything about sex. This is done primarily by the introduction of books on the reading lists of these children, like "It's Perfectly (Ab)Normal" and "Heather Has Two Mommies."

47 posted on 01/29/2003 4:02:20 PM PST by Houmatt (The OTHER Axis of Evil: The ACLU, Planned Parenthood, the NEA, and the Rats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RonF
dominate = dominant (I couldn't think of it at the time for some stupid reason, LOL)
48 posted on 01/29/2003 4:08:45 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: madg
Homosexuality is highly correlated with a number of environmental factors.

These factors are not universally found, but include and are not limited to: Sexual abuse at a young age, Sexual abuse at adolesence, low self-esteem, addictive behavior, seduction in the formative years, and generally being taught that physiological ejaculation is the same as orgasm with the albatross: "It wouldn't have happened if you weren't gay."

Which should almost completely describe why the incidence is 50% in twins (both do not always suffer one or more of the above, but will, about 1/2 the time) and not 2%, nor 100%.

It is a *learned* behavior, and as the screening of gay parents reaches to people more likely to act against the children they have or adopt, the incidence will rise.
49 posted on 01/29/2003 4:48:07 PM PST by Maelstrom (Government Limited to Enumerated Powers is your freedom to do what isn't in the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: madg
madg did not read the editorial

(just like his "gay" friends who harassed the editor erroneously referred to an ad as an article)
50 posted on 01/29/2003 6:18:31 PM PST by Notwithstanding (Are you pro-abortion because you were involved with one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-324 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson